Statement of the Society for the Protection of Animals Liable to Vivisection: On the Report of ...

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project

to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the

publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at |http: //books .google .com/I

h*

(

STATEMENT

! SOCIETY foil THE ITiOTECTKa HF ANIMALS
LIAJiLE TO VIVISEHTION,

REPOR'r 01'' THE ROYAL COMfflSSION
ON VIVISF.CTION.

I

I

i
I

4

PUBLISHED UY THE WXUKTY POK TDR I'KOTIWTION dP ANIMALS ,
LIAISLK TO VIVISECrlON, j

I, TWTORIi SiBllW, VltllJilHitKB., S.W. (CfiBNIlM UK 'HvTmLi. Strlet).

SOCIETY FOE THE PEOTECTION OF ANIMALS

LIABLE TO YIYISECTION.

*f^

Presidents and Vice-Presidents.

His Grace the Archbishop of York.

The Most Noble the Marquis of
Bute.

His Eminence Cardinal Manning.

The Right Hon. the Earl of Ports-
mouth.

The Right Hon. William Cowper-
Temple, M.P.

The Right Hon. James Stansfeld,
M.P.

The Right Hon. the Earl of Shaftes-
bury, K.G.

The Right Rev. the Bishop of Glou-
cester and Bristol.

The Right Rev. the Bishop of Man-
chester.

Lord Chief Justice Coleridge.

Lord Chief Baron Sir Fitzroy
Kelly.

Executive Committee.

Sir Frederick Elliot, K.C.M.G.
Major-General Colin Mackenzie,

C.B.
Leslie Stephen, Esq.
Mrs. Hensleigh Wedgewood.
Frances Elizabeth Hoggan,

M.D.
Edw. B. de Fonblanque, Esq.

Rev. C. J. Vaughan, D.D.
The Countess of Portsmouth.
The Countess of Camperdown.
John Locke, Esq., M.P., Q.C.
William Shaen, Esq., M.A.
Miss Lloyd.
Colonel Evelyn Wood, V.C, C.B.

The Vice-Presidents will sit occasionally as Honorary Members of the

Committee,

Hon. Treasurer.
C. J. Bun yon, Esq., 37, Phillimore Gardens, Kensington W.

Hon. Secretaries.

George Hoggan, Esq., M.B.
Miss Frances Power Cobbe.

*^ The Offices of the Society have been removed from 13, Granville Place
(temporarily lent by Dr. Hoggan), to 1, Victoria Street, Westminster (comer of
TothUl Street), within a few hundred yards of the Houses of Parliament.

By a Eesolution of the Committee, the Subscription for Membership of the
Society has been fixed at 10^., but it is hoped that larger Donations will be gene-
rally given. It is respectfully requested that all Contributions may be paid either
at the Office of the Society as above (P. 0. Orders made payable to the Clerk,
Mr. William Jackson), or (Cheques only) to the Bankers of the Society, Messrs.
Goslings and Sharpe, 19, Fleet Street, B.C.

OONTEIS'TS.

Statement, &c. 5

APPENDIX,

A. — Extension of the Practice of Vivisection, and Abuses con-
nected therewith 18

B.— Conduct of Students.................. 28

C. — Difficulty of obtaining Evidence •... 34

D.— Legislative Suggestions of the Witnesses before the Boyal
Commission. To which are added the Bills of Lord
Henniker and Dr. Lyon Playfair presented last year to •
Parliament 39

E.-*- Sensibility of Animals and Use of Anaesthetics 60

F. — Foreign Physiologists 65

O. — ^Seasons for Exemption of Horses, Asses, and Mules (as
well as the Household Animals), from Physiological
Experiments ...Mi.** • 79

▲ 2

A Boyal Commission was issued on the 22nd of June, 1875, ot
the following noblemen and gentlemen :

Viscount Cardwell,

Lord WiNMARLBIGH,

Rt. Hon. W. E. FoRSTER,
Sir John Buroess Karslaee,
Prof. Thomas Henry Huxley,
John Eric Erichsen, Esq.
Richard Holt Hutton, Esq.

The Commission was ordered :

" To inquire into the practice of subjecting live animals to
experiments for scientific purposes, and to consider and
report what measures, if any, it may be desirable to
take in respect of any such practice."

The Report of the Commissioners, drawn up in accordance with
the above command, is dated 8th January, 1876.

<

STATEMENT.

The Committee of the Society for the Protection of
Animals liable to Vivisection have perused the Eeport of
the Eoyal Commission on Vivisection, and proceed, accord-
ing to their original undertaking, to ofifer to the Society an
analysis of its leading contents. They are of opinion that the
purport of the Eeport has been in some respects seriously mis-
construed by the public, in consequence of certain imperfect
accounts which first obtained circulation.

After receiving an immense mass of evidence, the Eoyal
Commissioners have arrived unanimously at the conclusion,
that the impetus given of recent years to practical physiological
investigations, together with other reasons, justifies the public
call for attention to the mode in which they are pursued.
They remark :

" We find that until a comparatively recent period physio-
logy had been for some time past but little cultivated in this
country, but that there has been of late years a great movement
in advance. ... It is the expectation of those most conversant
with the subject that physiological investigations will more and
more take place in connection with public institutions, and that
an organized system of instruction in physiology ^yill speedily
become an important feature in scientific education. It is
evident therefore that the number of experiments at present
performed upon living animals can by no means be regarded as
the limit of the number which we are called upon to include in
our consideration, but that, on the contrary, we must assume
that the experimental method is being rapidly developed."

Statement on the R^ort of the

In considering the Eecommendations to be submitted to the
Queen, the Commission inquires whether Vivisections can be
altogether prohibited. Its decision is :

^' That such an enactment must, inevitably lead, either to a
general evasion 6f the law, or to an universal flight of medical
and physiological investigators and students from the United
Kingdom to foreign 4Mihools and laboratories, and that by this
means the general ti'eatment of animals in experiments would
certainly not be altered for the better."

Nor do they consider that, if possible, legislative prohibition
would be reasonable. They refer to the benefits which medi-
cine and snidery have received from discoveries made by such
means, and draw from them the deduction, that whether we
look to the possibility of cure, or to the probability of preven-
tion of disease, they cannot recommend their total prohibition.
Nevertheless, some legislative action on the subject appears
necessary. They quote the opinion of Sir William Fergusson,
Bart.—

*^If the public really knew what was actually going on in
this country at this time, they would expect an interference on
the part of the Crown and Parliament, just as much as with^
reference to the dissecting of dead bodies years ago (1040);

and add the judgments — -on the whole, in favour of some
legislative measure — of many eminent surgeons and physiolo-
gists : Dr. Burdon Sanderson, Dr. Michael Foster, Dr. Gamgee,
Sir Thomas Watson, Sir George Burrows, Sir James Paget,
Dr. Hf^ughton, and Professor Eolleston. The objections to
legislation on the subject, they remark, proceed principally
fix)m persons who, like Mr. Lister, appear to consider that any
interference of the law implies an imputation of cruelty against
the gentlemen engaged in such investigations.

Independently of authority in fevour of legislative inter-
ference, the Commission has felt itself called upon to recom-
mend it '' by reason of the'thing.**

Royal Commission on Vivisection.

" It is manifest that the practice (of Vivisection) is from its

nature liable to great abuse It is not to be doubted that

inhumanity may be found in many persons of high position as

physiologists That very severe experiments are constantly

performed cannot be doubted by those who read the document-
aiy evidence which has been laid before us, and the testimony
of Dr. Walker and other witnesses, who speak from personal
knowledge of the sufferings which, they say, have been often
unnecessarily inflicted in the name of Science.* Dr. Anthony,
who resides in the neighbourhood of Birmingham, told us that
he is acquainted with, instances of many men who carry on

experiments in private houses from mere curiosity "We

have had some evidence that cases have arisen in which the
unpractised student has taken upon himself in his private
lodgings to expose animals to torture without anaesthetics/' f

"Evidence of this nature," the Commissioa judiciously ob-
serves, "is not easily obtained,"! and proceeds to add :

" Besides the cases in which inhumanity exists, we are satis-
fied that there are others in which carelessness and indifference
prevail to an extent sufficient to form a ground for legislative
interference We Jhave been much struck by the conside-
ration that severe experiments have been engaged in for the
purpose of establishing results which have been considered in-
adequate to justify that severity by persons of very competent
authority. .... It is, moreover, much to be regretted that a
feeling of suspicion and even of abhorrence should have been
permitted to grow up among a large and very estimable portion
of the public against those who are devoted to the improvement
of medicine and the advancement of science."

After reviewing these arguments, the Commissioners con-
clude, among other points, that " the infliction of severe and
protracted agony is in ?iny case to be avoided, and that the
abuse of the practice (of Vivisection) by inhuman or unskilful
persons — in short, the infliction upon animals of any unneces-

* See Appendix A. (Abuses.)

t See Appendix B. (Conduct of Students.)

X See Appendix C. (Difficulty of obtaining Evidence.)

8 Statement on the Report of the

sary pain — \& justly abhorrent to the moral sense of your
Majesty's subjects generally, not least so of the most dis-
tinguished physiologists," &c.

The existing law, however, appears inadequate to deal with
the difficulty.

^^ It takes no special cognizance of the subject, but leaves it
to the operation of the Statute 12 & 13 Vict. c. 92, if indeed
that Act should be held to be applicable ; and the Act extends
only to domestic animals, leaving frogs, rabbits, guinea-pigs and
other animals, entirely unprotected. It gives, that is, in respect
of domestic animals, a remedy doubtful even if applicable, and
not easily enforced; and, in respect of others, no remedy at all."

After reviewing the two Bills laid last year before Parliament,
and the Bill prepared by the Eoyal Spciety for the Prevention
of Cruelty to Animals, Dr. Hoggan*s plan, and several schemes
proposed by different witnesses,* the Commission makes in
passing some* important remarks on the use of an8esthetics.f
They think that, " in framing rules for the administration of a
system, there ought to be much jealousy in too readily admit-
ting convenient doctrines, and that proper care should be taken
to insist upon the removal of the sensibility to pain even in
the case of cold-blooded animals." The use of Urari they spe-
cifically condemn, observing that it has been " positively stated
by perhaps the highest authority on such a subject, Claude
Bernard, to have no effect in producing insensibility to pain.*'
In conclusion, the Commission lays before the Queen the fol-
lowing outline of legislation :

"What we should humbly reconmiend to Your Majesty
would be the enactment of a law by which experiments upon
living animals, whether for original research or for demonstra-
tion, should be placed under the control of the Secretary of
State, who should have power to grant licenses to persons,
and, when satisfied of the propriety of doing so, to withdraw
them. No other persons should be permitted to perform expe-

* See Appendix D. (Legislative Suggestions.)
t See Appsndix E. (Sensibility of Animals.)

Royal Commission on Vivisection.

riments. The holders of licenses should be bound by condL
tions, and breach of the conditions should entail the liability
to forfeiture of the license ; the object of the conditions should
bo to ensure that suffering should never be inflicted in any
case in which it could be avoided, and should be reduced to
a minimum where it could not be altogether avoided. This
should be the general scope of the conditions ; but their de-
tailed application should be left to be modified from time to
time by the Minister responsible according to the dictates of
experience. In the administration of the system generally,
the responsible Minister would of course be guided by the
opinion of advisera of competent knowledge and experience.
Dr. Playfair's Bill provided a machinery for the purpose, and
some arrangements of the kind proposed in that measure would
be necessaiy. But we think it is inexpedient to divide the
responsibility of the Secretary of State with that of any other
persons by statutory enactment, and we recommend that his
advisers should be from time to time selected and nominated
by himself. Their naoaes should be made known to the pro-
fession and the public. It may be found desirable that one of
the conditions to be attached to a license should be that the
experiments should be performed in some particular place ;
but this is a detail which may vary with circumstances, and
we think it ought not to be stereotyped by statute.

" The Secretary of State must have the most complete power
of efiftcient inspection and of obtaining full returns and accurate
records of all experiments made. Any place in which experi-
ments are performed must be registered and open to efficient
inspection. The appointment of an inspector or inspectors
will be necessary, and we have seen that the analogy of the
Anatomy Act has been appealed to by many high authorities.
It is to be observed that the duties under that Act are of a
nature much more mechanical than those which will be required
in the present instance. The inspectors must be persons of
such character and position as to command the confidence of
the public no less than that of men of science.

"Abuse of the power conferred by the license must, of
course, render the holder liable to its withdrawal ; but this will
involve great disgrace ; and the withdrawal of the license of an
eminent man without real cause might be a serious public mis-

lo Statement on the Report of the

chief. We have felt it necessary, therefore, to consider what
steps should be taken when the question of such withdrawal
may arise. Wo think that the holder of a license, when he
shall receive notice that the Secretary of State intends to with-
draw it during the period for which it has been granted, should
be at liberty to demand a public inquiry ; that this inquiry
should be held before one of the Judges of the Supreme Court,
with two competent assessors to be appointed by the Secretary
of State, the Court having the full power of conducting it as a
legal investigation by summoning and swearing witnesses, issu-
ing commissions, and so forth : — that on the result of this
inquiry, the Secretary of State should determine whether the
license ought to be withdrawn, and when he decides in the
negative, should have the power of giving the holder of the
license the reasonable costs of his defence.

" Magistrates ought to be empowered, on cause shown, to
authorize the police to enter and search the premises of persons
suspected of performing experiments without a license, and the
performance of such experiments without a license should be
penal

"It has been suggested that cases may occur in which an
urgent necessity may have occasioned an experiment when there
has been no licensed person within reach, and it has not been
possible to apply for a license ; such as a sudden case of sus-
pected poisoning, arising, perhaps, in a remote place, when the
experiment has been reasonably considered indispensable, for
the purpose either of cure or of medico-legal investigation.
Bona-fide cases of this kind ought evidently to be free from the
risk of vexatious prosecution, and this can be secured by vesting
in the Secretary of State the power of putting a veto on a pro-
secution."

The Commission believe that by such a measure " the pro-
gress of medical knowledge may be made compatible with the
just requirements of humanity," and they trust

" — ^that her Majesty's Government and the Parliament of this
kingdom will recognize the claims of the lower animals to be
treated with humane consideration, and will establish the riglit
of the community to be assured that this claim shall not be
forgotten amid the triumphs of advancing Science."

Royal Commission on Vivtsectipn. 1 1

To this Eeport, which has been unanimously signed by the
Commissioners, one of them, Mr. Hutton, has appended his fur-
ther conclusions. He desires to suggest an additional restriction
to the proposed measure, namely, that the Household Animals,
dogs and cats, should be exempted altogether from liability
to experiments of this kind. The grounds of Mr. Hutton's
opinion he states to be three-fold :

1st. There is strong presumption that the demands of phy-
siologists for those creatures is supplied by persons who decoy
them away from their proper owners, and that in this way a
strong temptation is furnished for actual theft, and all the dis-
tress which thefts of this nature often cause. Mr. Hutton
refers to the answer of one physiologist (2823), that he was
"not informed** as to the way his dogs were procured ; and of
another (5747), that 90 cats had been "supplied to him by a
man,** and that he "made no inquiries.**

2ndly. Mr. Hutton would exempt dogs and cats from expe-
riment because, beyond other animals, they are endowed with
the intelligence which seems nearly to coincide in tlie animal
kingdom with high sensibility, and are liable to the hyper-
cesthesia to which civilized man appears susceptible beyond
the savage.

Srdly. Mr. Hutton argues that the claim of exemption from
painful experiment of the Household Animals " suggests itself
from the very nature of our relation to these creatures which we
have trained up in habits of obedience to man and of confidence
in him, so that there is something of the nature of treachery,
as well as of insensibility to their sufferings, in allowing them
to be subjected to severe pain even in the interests of Science.**
"If suffering is to be inflicted at all, with whatever humane
economy it is meted out, it is better, both as regards the evil
of enduring and the evil of inflicting it, that the humble friends
of man, which have been taught to obey and trust him, should
not be selected as the victims." Mr. Hutton further remarks :
" I may add, I do not find any trace in our evidence that there

1 2 Statement on the Report of the

is a single one of the important scientific discoveries which
have been represented to us as due to, or finally verified bj',
experiments of this kind, of which Science would have been
deprived had any such limitation as this been at the time in
force."

These important conclusions of the Eoyal Commission ap-
pear to require a few qualifying remarks and exceptions.

The Committee does not adopt the opinion that the benefits
derived from Vivisection justify it, when the pain inflicted on
the animal is serious and prolonged, or can be held to involve
a greater evil to the victim than death ; and they regret to
observe that the Commissioners have made no recommenda-
tion to prevent such abuse. They note, on the contrary, with
approval the opinion of the Commission, stated on p. 18 of the
Keport, that " th^ infliction of severe and protracted agony is in
any case to he avoided;" and they fully adopt Mr. Hutton's
observation, that "where the pursuit of scientific truth and
common compassion come into collision, it seems that the
ends of civilization, no less than of morality, require us to be
guided by the latter and higher principle." It may be observed,
further, that such a principle has received official recognition,
in a Minute of the Privy Council drawn up in 1874 by Mr.
Forster, for the direction of experiments on animals made
under the annual grant of £2000 for Scientific Investigations
in aid of Medicine. Mr. Forster concludes : " I desire to have
on record the opinion .... that no experiments on living
animals should be conducted at the cost of the State without
the employment of some anaesthetic in cases of painful opera-
tion, and without a report from time to time by the gentleman
conducting the experiments, explaining their object and show-
ing their necessity for the purpose of discovery" (1367).

They consider also that, in view of the evidence received,
the language of the Commission might have been somewhat
stronger in* condemning the abuses of the practice of Vivisec-
tion, and they think it probable that it would have been more
decisive but for the following untoward circumstances :

Royal Commission on Vivisection. 1 3

1st. As the Eeport remarks, the evidence respecting private
Vivisection done by students is " difficult to obtain," and few
witnesses were found to offer any direct testimony concerning
it, though several eminent men avowed their conviction that
it prevails to a lamentable extent in connection with nearly
every Medical School, and Mr. James Mills honourably con*
fessed with regret his own share in such practices when a
student in the Veterinary College at Edinburgh. Eespecting
the degrees of suffering inflicted in the laboratories of professed
physiologists in the United Kingdom, the Commission was
obliged to content itself without once checking the testimony
of the physiologists themselves by that of any attendant 01?
other eye-witness. Such evidence, had it been received, would
have been eminently satisfactory to the public, who can hardly
be expected to feel that all question is closed by the mere
opinion of gentlemen whose practice was the very subject of
investigation ; and amongst some of whom it appears that the
standard of humane conduct is such, that two of them main-
tained that it involved no great suffering for animals to be
starved, or baked to death, while two others defended their
own experiments on the portentous scale of 90 cats for one
series of very painful experiments, and of 36 dogs for another.*

2nd. It is noticeable that the opponents of Vivisection were
not represented on the Commission by a single physiologist
The Committee respectfully and gratefully recognize the care,
candour and ability, displayed by the Eoyal Commission during
its long and arduous labours. The Commissioners, however,
themselves remark: "We have not judged it our duty, the
majority of us not having had professional training, to decide
upon matters of differing professional opinion." It is to be
regretted that this inequality was not rectified by the presence
of at least one specially qualified Commissioner, who might, on
some of the many occasions of conflicting professional opinion,
have helped them to arrive at such a decision.

3rd. Wliilst bowing to the justice of the Commission's deci-

* See 2778, 4751, 4745, 5721.

14 Statement on the Report of the

sion " to avoid receiving adverse testimony in respect to
foreign physiologists beyond what is to be derived from their
own published writings," and only "receiving with pleasure
from competent witnesses an assurance of the humane spirit
which has been known to prevail in some foreign labora-
tories," the Committee regret that this course most unfortu-
nately excluded from the purview of the Commission those
darker facts concerning the recklessness of vivisectors, where-
upon a complete judgment on the subject could alone be
based. It is the opinion of this Committee that the abuses
of the practice have never yet attained in England anything
like the saihe extension as in Germany, Italy and France;
and that English physiologists, with few, if any, exceptions,
have so far remembered their national characteristics as gene-
rally to exercise at least a comparative degree of humanity
in their experiments. It is on the well-grounded fear that
the new zeal for such experiments now extending amongst
us, together with the importation of foreign teachers and the
influence of foreign example,* may ere long make English labo-
ratories scenes of no less cruelty than those of other countries,
that this Society has been formed ; and the Committee think
that without taking into full view the virulence of this moral
pestilence at our doors, it was not possible for. the Eoyal Com-
mission to enter a sufficiently stringent warning of the neces-
sity for legislation.

Finally, as regards the measures suggested to the Queen and
Parliament by the Commission, the Committee of the Society
for the Protection of Animals liable to Vivisection cannot, of
course, pronounce definitdy an opinion upon them until they
are embodied more or less perfectly in the Bill which, it is
confidently hoped, Her Majesty's Government will, with the
least possible delay, proceed to lay before the Legislature.
Whether the result will prove satisfactory or the reverse will
obviously depend on the details of the measure, and the
thoroughness wherewith they embody the principle thus hap-
* See Appendix F. (Foreign Physiologists.)

Royal Commission on Vivisection. 1 5

pily established by the Eoyal Commission, — that "the progress
of medical knowledge ought to be made compatible with the
just requirements of humanity." The Committee observes
with great regret that there is no proposal in the Eeport of
the Commission (such as was contained in Dr. Lyon Playfair's
recent Bill) prohibiting the use of Vivisection for purposes of
mere demonstration as distinct from research.

Mr. Hutton's suggestion " that the Household Animals, dogs
and cats, should be exempted from all experiments under the
meaning of the Act," meets with the full approval of the Com-
mittee, who would include under such exemption those other
faithful servants of man, the horse, ass and mule.* In con-
clusion, the Committee find a just summary of their senti-
ments in Mr. Hutton's expression of his views, " The measure
proposed mil not at all satisfy my own conceptions of the needs
of the case, unless it results in pviting an end to all eaperiments
involving not merely torture, hit anything at all approaching
thereto/*

* See Appendix G. Reasons for Exemption of Horses, &c.

APPENDIX.

B

APPENDIX.

It was the intention of the Committee of the Society for the
Protection of Animals liable to Vivisection to prepare for the use
of Members and others, a Digest of the entire Evidence presented
to the Eoyal Commission. This Evidence, however, is so voluminous
(extending to upwards of 6000 questions and answers), and the able
Report of the Commission has, on the whole, so fairly summarized
it, that the Committee have relinquished the larger design, and have
requested their Honorary Secretaries to prepare Extracts, tending
to substantiate the essential justice of the position taken by the
Society. The advocates of Vivisection may, it is thought, be left to
give, through the powerful journals at their disposal, any publicity
they desire to such portions of the Evidence as they may consider
favourable to their views and practice.

In Appendix D. will be found an abstract of all the views and
suggestions of the witnesses on the subject of Legislation ; to which
are added, for convenience of reference, the two Bills introduced last
Session into Parliament by Lord Henniker and Dr. Lyon Playfair.

b2

. (A.)

Extrcu:^ts of Evidence on Extension of the Practice of
Vivisection, and Abuses connected therewith.

The following extracts from the Evidence taken before the
Eoyal Commission, throw some light on these points.

Dr. ACLAND observes :

" The number of persons in this and other countries who are
becoming biologists without being medical men is very much in-
creasing. Modern civilization seems to be set upon acquiring bio-
logical knowledge, and one of the consequences of this is, that
whereas medical men are constantly engaged in the study of anatomy
and physiology for a humane purpose (that is, for the purpose of
doing immediate good to mankind), there are a number of persons
now who are engaged in the pursuit of these subjects for the purpose
of acquiring abstract knowledge. That is quite a diJBferent thing.
I am not at all sure that the mere acquisition of knowledge is not a
thing having some dangerous and mischievous tendencies in it. . . .
Now it has become a profession to discover ; and I have often met
persons who think that a man engaged in original research for the
sake of adding to knowledge is therefore a far superior being to a
practising physician, who is simply trying to do good with his know-
ledge. ... So many persons have got to deal with these wonderful
and beautiful organisms just as they deal with physical bodies that
Jiave no feeling and no consciousness" . . thus . . "the multiplicity of
these investigations has in a great measure 'arisen (944). I have every
reason for believing that it is often done abroad with what I should
call an unscientific carelessness, which would be so hurtful to the
moral sense of England that is would not be endured" (941).

Mr. G. H. Lewes says :

" One man discovers a fact or publishes an experiment, and
instantly all over Europe certain people set to work to repeat it.
They will repeat it, and repeat it, and repeat it" (6330).

Extension and Abuses of Vivisection. 2 1

Sir. W. Fergusson, Bart. :

" The impression on my mind is, that these experiments are done
frequently in a most reckless manner (1035), and (if known to the
public) would bring the reputation of certain scientific men far below
what it should be (1036). I have reason to imagine that suflferings
incidental to such operations are protracted in a very shocking man-
ner. I will give you an illustration of an animal being crucified for
several days, perhaps introduced several times into a lecture-room
for the class to see how the experiment was going on (1037). I
believe it (the above) to be done in this country" (1038). (Asked
his grounds for opinion that a great deal of reckless practice of Vivi-
section is going on at the present time) : " I hear young men who are
pupils, or have recently been pupils, speaking of what they have
seen in the theatres, lecture-rooms and laboratories of those who
profess to teach physiology" (1112).

Dr. Haughton :

" I believe that a large proportion of the experiments now per-
formed upon animals in England, Scotland and Ireland, are unne-
cessary and clumsy repetitions of well-known results. Young physio-
logists in England learn German and read experiments in Germ 'in
journals, and repeat them in this country. There is a good deal of
that second-rate sort of physiological practice going on" (1874).

Prof EOLLESTON :

(Asked whether his remark concerning the growth of moral feeling
applied to the last few years]) "It is rather the reverse, I should
think, within the last few years. There are eddies in a river which
is flowing from east .to west, but it is flowing all the same (1339).
With regard to all absorbing studies, that is the besetting sin of them
and of original research, that they lift a man so entirely above the
ordinary sphere of daily duty that it betrays him (in other lines of
original research as 'well as this) into selfishness and unscrupulous
neglect of duty (1287). Mr. Skey wrote in his work, * A man who
has the reputation of a splendid operator is ever a just object of
suspicion.* . . . Now a person who is operating on the lower a"iiimals,
who have no friends to remonstrate for them, is very much more
likely to give way to such a temptation than a person operating
upon human beings who would have friends (1287). If you take
up that book of SchifTs, you will find that almost every lecture
has some animal sacrificed for it (1343). Dr. Foster told me he
had never shew]} it (the experiment in the Handbook on Recur-
rent Sensibility) and never seen it himself* (1346). (Asked, "But
surely it is put here in a Handbook in a mode which would encou-
rage the trying of that experiment 1") " Obviously. I am speak-

2 2 Appendix.

ing in vindication of the character of a friend of mine, 'but not at
all in vindication of the hook*' (1347). (Asked, " Then I under-
stand that your opinion about the Handbook is, that it is a dangerous
book to society, and that it has warranted to some extent the feeling
of anxiety in the public which its publication has created 1") " I
am sorry to have to say that I do think that is so" (1351).

Prof. Humphry :

"Experiments have to be repeated and confirmed many times
before a fact is really established " (635). Thinks that the number
of experiments must increase very rapidly if the progress of science
is to be kept up" (740).

Dr. EUTHBBFOBD :

"I should say about half the experiments I have done" (are on
animals not under anaesthetics) (2843). Thinks there is '' consider-
able increase" in physiological experimentation (2848).

Dr. Gamqbb, Owens' College :

"I think that Vivisection has been practised almost too little
(5383). My lectures to junior students are attended this session by
40 students, those to second-year students by 42 (5384). I may
say that we are making great efforts in Owens' College to encourage .
qualified persons to engage in physiological research ; and for that
purpose we have provided a laboratory, and we have a physiological
scholarship" (5385).

Dr. Crichton Bbown describes :

Forty-six animals sacrificed in trying if chloral were antagonistic
to pycrotoxine. " Cases of poisoning by pycrotoxine are of very
rare occurrence" (3164, 3168). Twenty-nine animals used in Fer-
rier's series (3178).

Mr. ScHAFEE says :

"A very large number of animals" are used at Ludwig's labora-
tory. " Hundreds (a-year), if you take animals of all kinds ; of
rabbits and dogs, I suppose, more than a hundred (3853), without
counting the frog" (3855).

Sir G. BuBEOWS thinks :

" There have been great abuses in the performance of experiments
on living animals (157), and that those abuses ought to be restrained"
(158).

Dr. SWAYNE Taylob :

" A very eminent (French) toxicologist was in the habit of expe-
rimenting on dogs on a very large scale indeed ; and after giving

Extension and Abuses of Vivisection. 23

the poisons — nearly every poison in the. list that we know of — ^he
cut into the neck to tie their gullets to prevent the animal vomiting,
and of course that must have caused great pain and suffering ; and
it defeated the object which the toxicologist ought to have in view,

because it placed the animal in an unnatural condition For

that reason, in my work on Toxicology, I have not been able to
make any use of the hundreds of these experiments which this
French physician performed (1171). In Palmer's case, the destruc-
tion of sixty animals was really quite unnecessary. It was merely
an attempt to overwhelm the evidence for the prosecution by the
number of experiments (1197). Putting a frog into water at 40°
cent. = 100° Fahr., like putting a warm-blooded creature into 212°,
a cruel experiment. I cannot see what purpose it would answer"
(1258, 1259). Experiment (p. 108 of Handbook) on mesentery of
a frog, " a very painful experiment, and I do not see what good pur-
pose it would answer" (1271).

Dr. Walker :

" Inflammation by chemical and traumatic agents was set up in
the joints and in the transparent cornea of the eye by passing a
tliread through it and establishing a seton. These experiments
caused great pain, and the lambs and dogs on which they were per-
formed were unable to rest day or night ; and if some ease enabled
them occasionally to rest, the experimenter used to exasperate the
wounds afresh, and thus make rest impossible (1727). One case of
gastric fistula having been established, the posterior half of a living
IVog was inserted into the aperture leading to the stomach of the
dog, while the anterior half, head and legs, protruded externally, and
were fastened there until half of the frog was nearly digested away.
As the gastric juice gradually ate away the skin, the nerves and the
muscles, the frog made desperate efforts to escape by moving its
anterior extremities very rapidly." (See Claude Bernard, Physiologie^
Vol. II. p. 409, 1856!) ..." He had done the experiment before, and
was certain of the results obtained ; the repetition before his class
was wanton and cruel" (4888). Dr. Walker further described the fol-
lowing experiments : Forcing substances into the stomach of a dog
after exposing the gullet and tying it to prevent vomiting ; opening
the abdomen, tying a portion of the small intestine in two places,
opening the intermediate portion, and injecting a noxious fluid into
it ; starving rabbits till they would eat dead frogs ; forcing boiling
water into a dog*s stomach ; boiling frogs ; starving pigeons till they
dropped from their perches, and then cutting off their anterior or pos-
terior extremities to show that this caused death when the organism
was exhausted from want of food. (See Medical Times and Gazette^
Aug. 18th, 1860, p. 151.) Showed sketch of an experiment from
Claude Bernard (Systhme Nerveux, Oct. 1st, 1858, p. 188), to prove
the effect of exhaustion on the nervous system. The exhaustion waa

24 Appendix.

brought about by exposing the two largest nerves, nailing the feet of
the frog to a board, and depriving it of food. The various stages of
exhaustion were tested by an occasional discharge of the electric cur-
rent on one of the exposed nerves (4888). Dr. Walker says that ho
has attempted to get into physiological laboratories in England to see
what was going on, but found it impossible, and an acquaintance of
his was refused admittance. '' I could bring forward many cases in
which ten, twenty or thirty animals have been subjected to the same
experiments and have given in each case the same result, and I con-
sider that a cruel abuse of power (1729). I have seen frogs kept in
close jars for months till ulcers formed, and the animals were ex-
hibited by the professor as shewing the evil effects of close confine-
ment (1730). The sketch represents a frog prepared in this way. The
two sciatic nerves are laid bare for about half an inch. The animal
is then placed in a small trough containing oil or glycerine, and kept
in situ by nailing its feet In this state the animals live as long as
nature can endure such torture, while the experimenter may apply
the galvanic current to the nerves, or otherwise stimulate them,
whenever he feels disposed to do so (1729). The purpose was to
preserve the nerves from drying up and withering" (1730).

Mr. W. B. Scott, M.D. :

Saw at Edinburgh, in the physiological laboratory attached to
the University, frogs under urari ripped open, the mesentery placed
under a microscope ; cannot have been in pain for less than two
hours (5192). Eefers to a passage (p. 162) of the Handbook, in
which a most painful experiment on the tongue of an animal may
last for forty-eight hours (5194).

*

Dr. Landeb Brunton :

They (his experiments on cats) are still going on (Dec. 1875)
(5729) at his own laboratory at St. Bartholomew's (6730). Are
killed at the end of four or five hours (5727). ** When I said just
now that I used ninetv cats, I should have said that was in one
scries, but I am now at the third series. The number ninety is not
the whole that is included in the investigation. I have used a
much larger number (5747). For the snake poison experiments I
should think I have used about 150 of different kinds — rabbits,
guinea-pigs, frogs, dogs, and fowls*' (5747, 5748). Asked whether
the use of chloroform would have vitiated Dr. Eutherford's experi-
ments on drugs or the liver? *'No" (5760).

Dr. HOGGAK :

** This which I hold in my hand is an account which came into
my hand only on Saturday from the ' British Medical Journal* My
mere opinion upon these experiments is that they were very cruel,
veiy painful, and as far as I can see they were useless, and not to
be depended upon as far as application to man was concerned.

Extension and Abuses of Vivisection. . 25

Animals, namely dogs, were kept fasting, in the first place, for
eighteen or nineteen hours, a thing that would never be attempted
upon the human being upon which cholagogues were being admi-
nistered. Curari was given, a substance the effect of which on the
liver has not yet been examined thoroughly, but we know this, that
in almost all glands it increases the secretion very much, and would
throw matters into an abnormal condition. The animal has been
kept under curari when there was no anaesthetic, no narcotic given ;
no narcotic, indeed, could be given, for there it would interfere, as
a separate drug, with the experiment. Therefore, those animals,
from the time that they were placed under curari, were kept under
curari eight, seven, six, and five hours, suffering pain in consequence
of an operation being performed which opened their abdomen, an
operation made to find out the bile duct, and separate it from the
other structures which lie with it in the gastro-hepatic omentum.
A glass canula is then tied in the bile duct, and the bile drops by
means of a tube. All that human beings know is the pain there is
when gall stones are passing down the bile duct, and that is known
to give excessive torture. Merely a little bit of fat passing down
gives us intense pain, and we can form an opinion that to take out
the duct, to disturb all these parts, and manipulate it, as has been
done, would cause more intense pain. And in that condition the
animals were kept conscious and fully sensitive (I have any amount
of evidence to prove this if there is any doubt about it), while the
experiments were being tried upon them. I say that the conditions
were abnormal to such a degree that they could never be applied to
men; and that the pain was excessive; and that the experiments
were uncalled for, and cruel in the extreme; and I put in a paper
by Dr. Eutherford himself, in the 'British Medical Journal* of
October 23rd, as evidence of that point. This view of Dr. Ruther-
ford's only forms another of the numerous opposing views on the
same question ; agreeing on one point only with the committee who
sat in the same university, and the professor who was in the same
chair before him a few years ago (and under whom I received my
tuition) namely, that mercury had no effect on dogs. Nearly the
whole medical profession agree that it has a great effect on human
beings. So that the only point on which these people agree, after
all their cruel experiments, is, that what is applicable to the dog is
not applicable to man" (3464).*

* Perhaps the greatest blunder committed in these experiments was a
fundamental one, which destroyed any vestige of reliance upon them.
The desi^ was to learn about the therapeviic action of certain chologo-
gues, while the method employed only showed their topical action. In
this way most of the acids in the Pharmacopoeia would have shown better
results as chologogues, although it would be absurd to administer them
as such to man. — G. H.

26 Appendix.

Dr. Rutherford (examined concerning above experiment) :

("In your judgment, are operations of that description upon the
dog to be taken as evidence of what the effect would be on a human
being T) Certainly not ; but merely as suggesting what the action
would be ; that is all. The experiment must also be tried upon men
before a conclusion can be drawn (2966). Last year, for purposes
of research, I think I used about forty dogs" (2993).

Dr. John Anthony :

" Very frequently men who are in the habit of making these ex-
periments, at all events the French, are very careless of what becomes
of an animal when it has served its purpose. The brain is exposed,
portions of it are cut or pinched or torn, and then the animal, having
served its purpose, is thrown on the floor to creep into a corner and
die" (2448).

Dr. Hoggan having produced the Trench copy of Paul Bert's
observations on a curarized dog in the Archives de Physiologic,
Vol. II., p. 650, 1869, added the following remarks :

" In this experiment a dog was first rendered helpless and in-
capable of any movement, even of breathing, v/hich function was
performed by a machine blowing through a hole in its wind-pipe.
All this time, however, * its intelligence, its sensitiveness, and its
will remained intact ; a condition accompanied by the most atro-
cious sufferings that the imagination of man can conceive* {vide
Claude Bernard, in Eevue des Deux Mondes, 1st September, 1864,
pp. 173, 182, 183, &c.). In this condition the side of the face, the
side of the neck, the side of the fore-leg, the interior of the belly
and the hip, were dissected out in order to lay bare respectively the
sciatic, the splanchnics, the median, the pneumo-gastric and sym-
pathetic, and the infra-orbital nerves. These were excited by elec-
tricity for ten consecutive hours, during which time the animal must
have suffered unutterable torment, unrelieved even by a cxf. The
crowning discovery made, to which the experimenter calls special
attention, being, that at times, when thus tortured, it urinated!
The inquisitors then left for their homes, leaving the tortured
victim sdone with the clanking engine working upon it, till death
came in the silence of the night, and set the sufferer free " (4111).

Mr. Jesse :

"I will now quote from the Edinburgh Medical and Surgical
Journal, Vol. LXIII. Art. 1, An Experimental Inquiry into the
Pathology and Treatment of Asphyxia, by John E. Erichsen (6453) :
* Experiment 9. Three mongrel terriers. A, B, C, were properly-
secured (6466). . . . One of the jugular veins of the centre dog was

Extension and Abuses of Vivisection. 27

then exposed, and a ligature was passed under it, so that it might
be punctured so as to avoid the occurrence of plethora and apoplexy
when the carotid arteries of the two lateral dogs were connected
with the corresponding vessels of the central one. . . . The central
dog began to struggle. . . . The lateral dogs were both alive, but
evidently enfeebled Jby loss of blood*" (6458). Mr. Erichseii
(Commissioner) : " xnose experiments were made by me, in con-
junction partly with Dr. Sharpey, from a grant. We were appointed
in the year 1842 by the British Association for the Advancement
of Science to inquire into the subject of asphyxia. A grant of
money was given by that Association for that purpose " (6459).

(B.)

Extracts of Evidence on Conduct of Students.

■•i*

A written statement by Mr. James B. Mills, M.RC.V.S.,
was entered in evidence by Mr. Colam as follows :

" Observing from the daily papers that Mr. Ernest Hart alleges that
students do not perform experiments on living animals as an exercise
in the prosecution of their studies, I beg to forward to you a summary
of my experience in that respect during my college career at Edin-
burgh. I am a veterinary surgeon, and comparatively unknown, but
I feel it my duty to aid your Society in repressing unnecessary expe-
rimentation ; surveying the past as I do with much regret, so far as
I have participated in the practices which I am now compelled to
condemn. At Edinburgh the veterinary students and the medical
students frequently associate for pleasure and for study. During
my first term I was admitted only to two private meetings where
experiments were conducted by students alone; but in the following
term, having become a senior, I was introduced to a great number
of such vivisections, and on some occasions operated myself. The
experiments were certainly never designed to discover any new fact,
or elucidate any obscure phenomena, but simply to demonstrate the
most ordinary facts of physiology. Our victims were sometimes
dogs, but more frequently cats. Many of the latter were caught by
means of a poisoned bait, the animals being secured whilst suffering
from the agonies caused by the poison, when antidotes were applied
for their restoration. They were then imprisoned in a cupboard at
the students' lodgings, and kept there until a meeting could be
arranged. Sometimes the students secured their victims by what is
known as a cat hunt, that is a raid on cats by students armed witli
sticks late at night. I am not prepared to say that the object of
the students was to commit cruelty, or that there was any morbid
desire to witness pain, but I say emphatically that there was no
other motive than idle curiosity and heedless, reckless love of experi-
mentation. What, for instance, could justify the following experi-
ment, performed for the purpose of witnessing the action of a cat's

Conduct of Students. 29

heart ? The operator first of all made an incision through the skin
of the animaFs chest extending from the neck to the belly. The
skin was then laid back by hooks, in order to enable the operator to
cut through the cartilage of the breast-hone, and to draw his knife
across the ribs for the purpose of nicking them. This process is
necessary to enable him to snap the ribs and lay the fractured parts
back, which also are secured with hooks. It is needless to say that
such operation is a most cruel one ; but it is only one of several
others performed at Edinburgh. Kow, the action of the heart is
well known, and is one of the first things taught to students of
physiology, and can be taught as well without experimentation as
with. In a few cases the aniipals were narcotized, when no suffer-
ing was caused either in the process of poisoning or in the after
experimentations. The securing an animal for an operation like
the above, requires experience and care, and it is fearful to witness
the struggles of the animal while this is being done. I desire to
exonerate the professors from any participation in the experiments
performed by students which were conducted at the private lodgings
of students, when none but students were present. I merely write
this in order to give my humble corroboration of the statement made
in the Memorial, that students ar6 in the habit of performing experi-
ments.— James B. Mills, M.E.C.V.S.'* (1687).

On cross-examination, Mr. Mills confirmed these state-
ments. He said :

"The experiments** (made chiefly on cats and dogs) "had no
other motive than idle curiosity and reckless love of experimenta-
tion** (4932). All the students (a class of seventy or eighty) assisted
more or less at these useless experiments (4942). They were some-
times done in public in the yard of the College (4948). " The habit
of doing such things is sure to go on unless a stop is put to it *'
(4953). He referred to a special case which occurred last winter
session. A horse was bought for the purpose of dissection. This
animal was subjected during a whole week to various operations,
such as tenotomy and neurotomy, &c. (4957). The operations were
" very painful ** (4960). JS'o anaesthetics of any kind were given
(4959). The Principal must have known that this was done within
the precincts of the College (4964). The experiments were made "all
over the animal'* (4966). Another experiment, shared by Mr. Mills,
was on a cat, when six students were present^ — four veterinary and
two medical students (5071, 5073). The thorax of the cat was
opened to see the heart beating (5074). Ko chloroform was adminis-
tered, and the cat died after seven or eight minutes (5082, 5084).
A dog, which was first half-poisoned and then restored by an anti.
dote, received " brutal usage." The brains were knocked out by a

30 Appendix.

hammer (5155). The landlady of the students threatened to com-
plain when they had killed her cat (5158).

The story of the horse was subsequently confirmed by Prin-
cipal Williams (6033).

Dr. Scott :

After describing how he ceased to attend the physiological lec-
tures in Edinburgh on account of the cruelty he witnessed, says that
''it did nou provoke the slightest symptoms of abhorrence among
those who witnessed it." He ''never knew an operation cause the
least abhorrence to a medical student" (5201). Vivisection, he
believes, goes on among students in their own rooms (5238).

Three of the witnesses bore testimony to their sense of the
extreme moral danger of sufifering young students to witness
Vivisections.

Prof EoLLESTON, of Oxford, remarked :

"Kingsley speaks of 'the sleeping devil that is in the heart of
every man,' but you may say it is the lower nature which we possess
in common with the Carnivora. It is just this, that the sight of a
living, bleeding and quivering organism most undoubtedly does act
in a particular way upon what Dr. Carpenter calls, the emotiono-
motor nature in us. I know that many men are superior to it; but
I beg to say that, if we are talking of legislation, we are not to
legislate for the good, but for the mass who I submit are not
always good "(1287).

Dr. Anthony :

Knows himself of instances of young men from mere curiosity,
carrying on these experiments (2509). Could mention them, but
would scarcely like to do so (2510). !No anaesthetics are used to
diminish the pain of the creatures (2518). Respecting demonstra-
tions by professors to students, Dr. Anthony says : '' I believe the
more you keep the scenic element away the better. The reason is
the existence of a morbid curiosity. There is a morbid curiosity
which is known to medical men well with reference to operations
of all kinds. There are a certain number of persons who are very
fond of coming to see the different operations at the hospitals. I
look upon that, and particularly upon the desire of seeing these
experiments on animals, as sometlung very, very morbid indeed
(2450).

Conduct of Students. 3 1

Dr. Haughton :

" I would shrink with horror from accustoming large classes of
young men to the sight of animals under vivisection. I believe
that many of them would become cruel and hardened, and would
go away and repeat those experiments recklessly. Science would
gain nothing, and the world would have let loose upon it a set of
young devils " (1888).

Evidence was also offered of several cases wherin the later
judgment and more mature feeling of older physiologists caused
them to regret the recklessness of their early vivisections.

Sir William Fergusson observed that :

" Mr. Syme lived to express an abhorrence of such operations, at
all events if they were not useful (1028). His ultimate authority
was strongly on the other side (against them), as expressed in a
special report of his own (1029). Il^o man perhaps has ever had
more experience of the human subject than Mr. Syme, and I myself
have a strong opinion that such an expression, coming from Mr.
Syme, was a mature and valuable opinion" (1030). (Asked whe-
ther his opinion in mature life was much less favourable to these
experiments than when he was young ?) " Yes, because I had not
the same grasp of the subject at that time. I was more, perhaps,
influenced by what other people had done, and by the wish to come
up to what they had done in such matters ; but the more matured
judgment of recent years has led me to say to myself now, that I
would not perform some of the operations at this present time that
I performed myself in earlier days" (1031).

Prof. EoLLESTON Stated :

^* Haller fell in his later age into a permanent anguish of con-
science, which is shown in his epistles, reproaching himself most
bitterly for his vivisections (stated by Krug). I should wish to
state that Haller was by no means in his dotage at that time —
quite the reverse. He was not seventy when he died. That is
the striking point ; and I think I may say this (but I shall not
give the name), that it is within my own personal experience that
a person who has a considerable name before the world, and has
performed a large number of vivisections in his time, has expressed
himself to me as exceedingly sorry that he ever did them — did
them, I should say, to the extent which he did" (1290).

And again :

"Dr. Child, who has been a practising doctor and is now an
exceedingly useful inspector of health, wrote a book about ten years

32 Appendix.

ago in which he dealt with this subject. He has said to me dis-
tinctly that if he were to write that essay over again, he should
recommend legislative interference, which he then thought was not
necessary" (1340).

Dr. Ceisp says of himself :

" I am rather a penitent on this question. I have been a Vivi-
sector for some time; and as I advanced in age, and I hope in
wisdom, I saw fit to alter many opinions," &c. (6157).

*^* The above evidence appears on the one hand. On the
other, some of the Commissioners, drawing attention to a pas-
sage in a pamphlet circulated by the Society for the Protection
of Animals liable to Vivisection, entitled, The, Moral A^ects of
Vivisection, concerning the duty of exercising caution in the
exhibition of painful experiments to students, elicited from Sir
William Gull the opinion that " he had never seen anything
aflfording the remotest justification of the phraseology" of the
passage (5502); and from Prof. Ferrier a similar reply, that he
should think the passage a "gross libel upon a class" (3350).
In each case, it may be observed, the Commissioners overlooked
the beginning of the paragraph to which they took exception,
and which (had it been read in its place) would have proved
that medical students were not accused of having " maleficent
tendencies" over and above other young men, but simply of
sharing the general recklessness of youth. Unless it is wished
to argue that medical students are of a diiferent nature and
more delicate moral fibre than their contemporaries in other
professions, the charge of "libelling" them, by including them
in the same description, seems to fall to the ground. As an
instance of hardly fair quotation, the passage is here reproduced
—with the preceding and omitted sentence, in italics. It must
be premised that the argument of the whole pamphlet, from
the first page, turns on the fact, that " the notion of the extreme
tenderness and sensibility of early youth, especially in the
male human creature," is a mistake ; and that " that type of

Conduct of Students. 3 3

cruelty which comes of ignorance and recklessness of suffering,
and wherein Curiosity, not Malice, is the prevailing motive, is
at its worst in adolescence" (p. 1).

" Young men at the age of ordinary medical students are, as I
began by remarkiJig, filled with curiosity and exceedingly empty of
sympathy and pity. An eminent physiologist recently bore testi-
mony to his surprise when a whole class of his pupils trooped out
of his lecture-room, on purpose to see the assistant kill a creature
which he had considerately intended should be despatched out of
sight before dissection. * T remained alone in my chair,' he observed,
*a sadder and a wiser man.' The same keenness of observation,
or a memory of their own youthful insensibility, ought to teach all
professors of physiology that they are indulging a maleficent ten-
dency which already exists in their pupils' disposition, when they
invite mere lads of the Bob Sawyer type to watch their experiments
— the more frightful, so much, alas ! to some, the more attractive."
Moral Aspects of Vivisection, p. 10.)

(C.)

Extracts illustrating the Difficulty of obtaining Evidence.

Dr. Haughton remarked that :

** The practice of vivisection in physiological laboratories is noto-
rious, but difficult to prove, as even those who object to the abuse
of the practice (like myself) will not come forward and give evi-
dence.against scientific brethren" (18G7).

Dr. Anthony :

(After stating that he knew of young medical men engaged in
vivisection merely from curiosity, being pressed to give some fur-
ther clue for inquiries, replied) : " I am afraid I must refuse it . . .
I could not drag down public opinion on friends or acquaintances
who have informed me that they have done things of the sort"*
(2524).

Mr. Mills (asked) :

"Are you prepared to give us the names of the students to whom
you refer ?" — "No ; T could not do that, because it would be break-
ing honour with them" (4941).

* A system of terrorism, indeed, almost seems to have prevailed during
the past season, whereby the natural objection of honourable men to bear
testimony against their colleagues has been perhaps reinforced. The Hon.
Secretaries of the Society for the Protection of Animals liable to Vivisec-
tion have received from some medical men, for whose assistance they
had appealed, letters of which the following extracts seem to throw con-
Biderable light on the subject. The first is from a successful physician in
the West-end. He says : " Your letter gave me a great deal of pleasure,
and I shall be most happy to contribute my mite of — guineas (a most
handsome subscription). I do not, however, wish my name to appear as
yet, for angry feelings have arisen, and I have many friends among the
medical authorities who, I am sorry to say, are on the wrong side." The
second example ia even more emphatic, being from a gentleman con-
spicuous in the front rank of the profession, who has already shown
considerable moral courage on this question. He says : " I deeply sym-
pathize with your objects and exertions, and wish great success to the
Society ; but I am not prepared at present to take any active steps
against the opinions and actions of many members of my profession wno
are advocates of the practices in question."

' Difficulty of obtaining Evidence. 3^5

The Commissioners appear to have been repeatedly foiled in
their endeavours to extract any admission concerning the books
or proceedings of their colleagues from the physiologists under
examination. The following are examples of their ineifectual
efforts in this direction, almost recalling the replies of the wit-
nesses at a once famous Eoyal Trial, Non sb; non mi ricm^do;
and justifying Dr. Hoggan's remark, that they "might just as
well inquire into Freemasonry" (4288), and Dr. Walker's
observation, that "it is impossible to argue the point of
humanity with most professional vivisectors. They appear to
ignore everything ; they see no kind of abuse, and very often
no pain. This is the result of habit and e^it de corps**
(4909).

Sir G. Burrows :

Knows of the existence of the Handbook, but cannot say he
has read it (205). (Asked about Professor Legg's experiments) :
" I have been ten years away from St. Bartholomew's. Better as-
certain that from other sources " (227). (Asked concerning frogs
sht open under curari and kept for two hours) : " Does not know if
he would justify the experiment; would not like to express an
opinion" (243).

Sir James Paget :

. Knows nothing of the experiments at Florence, Leipsic, Vienna,
or Paris (379).

Dr. Sharpey :

Thinks that abuses might take place, but he does not know it
(454). There are people in the country who are hunting a mere
Will-o'-the-wisp, and drawing sober people after them (456). Had
not read Legg's Eepoi-t in detail (577).

Prof. Humphry :

Had " glanced " at the Handbook (659). (At Norwich) " I heard
that something was going on, and went into the room, but very
soon had to leave it. I merely saw an animal on the table, and
some one doing something to it. What they were doing, I did
not know at all, and I was unable to remain and ascertain" (716).
Cannot say positively that he has seen experiments under curari
(777).

C2

36 Appendix.

Prof. Williams :

Asked concerning the return of animals used for experiment in
his College made to the Commission. Had certified that "only
frogs" were used, and anaesthetics always used; and on it being
proved that horses were experimented upon even by himself with-
out rendering them unconscious, he replies, " I never thought of the
horse at the time; the thing really escaped my memory" (6084). The
Commission then asked, " And you, I suppose, also forgot what had
happened when you sent the next answer, in which it is said that
the animals are always rendered unconscious ] " " Yes " (6086).

Mr. SCHAFEE :

"Never heard of such a thing" as physiologists practising privately
in their houses or in private laboratories (3818).

This last observation is not a little surprising, considering
the notoriety of Dr. Eichardson's experiments at his private
residence in London, and those of Mr. G. H. Lewes, who boasts
that, " though not a member of the profession, there are few
members of the profession who have done more physiological
work than I have" (6334).

Dr. BuEDON Sandeeson:

" Does not think he can give a guess at all " at the number of
animals consumed in a year in Ludwig's or Claude Bernard's labora-
tories (2744). "Cannot give any idea" of the number of experi-
ments in the Handbook which were painful (2748). Would prefer
not answering (a question about Sir Robt. Christison) with reference
to the particular case, "because I do not remember" (2753). (Asked
about baking animals to death by MM. Delaroche and Berger, to
see at what temperature they would die) : " Those experiments
might, if they were conducted with skill, be on one hand productive
of important results, and on the other not be attended with much
pain, because an animal, when subjected to a high temperature, very
soon comes to a point at which pain ceases. I cannot comment
upon the particular experiment, because I do not know it" (2778).
(Asked about the choice of M. Dupuy for teaching in the College
for the Medical Education of Women, a French vivisector, wht)
could not express himself in very good English, when two, an
Englishman and a Scotchman, offered themselves, who would not
have used vivisection) : " I took no active part in the affair at all
(2792). All that I did was to express my favourable opinion of
Dr. Dupuy as a physiologist, but I did not express any opinion of the
others" (2793). (Asked, "Did not Dr. Dupuy resign because the

Difficulty of obtaining Evidence. 3 7

young women would not attend vivisectional experiments 1") "I
am sorry to say I cannot tell you anything about that (2794). I
know nothing about the matter since that time" (2795). (Asked
how he procures dogs for experiments at University College Hos-
pital ?) " We depend very much upon our servant, who is a very
reliable and respectable man, and who always acts in a straightfor-
ward way in the purchase of animals.* I have no precise knowledge
as to the methods which are used" (2821).

Dr. Carpentee:

Asked, ** I see an experiment narrated in your own work on
Physiology, as to which I should like to know whether you think
it was really a desirable one to make. I find this stated : * The
introduction of a little boiling water threw the animal at once into
a kind of adynamic state, which was followed by death in three or
four hours ; the mucous membrane of the stomach was found red
and swollen, whilst an abundant exudation of blackish fluid had
taken place into the cavity of the organ.* It is not one of your own
experiments, but one of which you are there narrating the results,
Now do you not think that that might have been argued as one of
the most certain inferences from the well-known facts of human
experience, and that it was quite an unnecessary experiment to
make?" — "That which you have just read is probably taken from
a late edition of my book" (5616). "It is the seventh edition,
by Mr. Power, p. 129." — "It is not an experiment that I am ac-
quainted with. I have so far given up the study of human physio-
logy, that I have really not kept pace with the inquiries to which
that experiment relates " (5617). "Then this experiment was not
published by you ?" — " No. I would not give an opinion upon it
without knowing the purpose of it" (5618). "It is published in
your book, but not by you ?" — "Not by me" (5619).

With respect to foreign physiologists, it would appear that
their own accounts of their proceedings, oflfered to the public
in the newspapers and those confided to the more select circles
of their scientific readers, vary to a startling extent Prof.
EoUeston exhibited to the Commission the following excerpts
from Prof. Schiflfs well-known Letter, and from the same gen-
tleman's Lectures :

" Prof. Schiff says, in a work of his (Legons sur la Physiologie
de la Digestion, Tom. I. p. 291, dated 1868), that when dogs come

* Why was this " reliable man" not examined ?

38 Appendix.

into his laboratory he finds it necessary to cut two of their nerves

(the nerves of vocalization) * Je suis oblige de faire subir cette

derni^re operation k beaucoup de nos chiens fraichement arriv^ au
laboratoire pour les empecher de se livrer k des concerts nocturnes
trop bruyants et de discrediter ainsi les Etudes physiologiques aupres
des habitants du quartier.'* Further, in a letter of Prof. SchiiFs in
the Times of Jan 7th, 1874, he distinctly says that the reason that
the inhabitants of the district were not so disturbed as that French
quotation says they might have been, was, that there were no dogs
in pain in his laboratory'' (1287).

* As an accompaniment to the above, we extract the following from
Claude Bernard's Liquides de Vorganisme, p. 40 : " We cut out the

kidneys from a bulldog Next day, twenty-four hours after the

operation, the dog, without being enfeebled, appeared dejected, respira-
tion was impeded and sighing ; he had vomited during the night ; he
refused all food and avoided movement. The dog appeared to suffer and
at times cried out ; in order that his cries should not disturb the neigh-
bours, we applied a muzzle pretty tightly. When during the day we
returned, we found the doglying dead, his muzzle bathed in a foetid fluid
which he had vomited. The muzzle had hindered the expulsion of the
vomiting and caused the animal to be sulFocated by it."

(D.)

Extracts of Evidence on Legislation.

Sir J. Watson, Bart., M.D., late President of the Eoyal
College of Physicians :

Thinks that persons who should prosecute such experiments ought
to be such only as might be licensed by some high authority to do it
(107). Issuing of licenses ought to be vested in some high authority,
such as one of the Secretaries of State, properly advised by a res-
ponsible officer "(111). Would have " an Inspector of physiological
laboratories, as we now have an inspector of dissecting-rooms
(116). A general License permission, not for each experimenter
series (118), subject to revocation if abused (119).

Sir 6. BuREOWS, Bart., M.D., President of the Eoyal Col-
lege of Physicians :

Thinks "there ought to be somebody to advise him (the Home
Secretary) having functions somewhat analogous to the Inspector

of Anatomy who should send in a written repoft"

(167). "I think that there should be some officer or person
apppinted who is a fit person, good anatomist, and a physio-
logist himself, who is competent to form an opinion, and that his
opinion should be given to the Secretary of State, and that this

individual should be a permanent officer. I think it would

never do to leave it to the Secretary of State, unless he had good
information to guide him" (172). Licensed places (173).

Sir James Paget, Bart., President of the Medical and
Chirurgical Society :

The Resolutions of the British Association have received his
entire approval, and that of Darwin, Huxley, Owen, Gull, Jenner,
&c. (268). Where courses of experiments are to be made it ought
to be with the consent of a Committee of medical ofiScers and
lecturers, or even some of the Governors of the hospital (320 and

40 Appendix.

326). N'o objection to Inspector, as of anatomy. " If there is
any legislation at all, I should think it must take that form " (328).
Thinks public opinion sufficient without legislation (341).

William Shaepey, M.D., LLD., Secretary to the Eoyal
Society :

" Who is competent to inspect and say what is a scientific result
or not % You must trust to the persons that you permit to make
these experiments (581). K you come to the question of legis-
lation about it, I think that such a person might be authorized or
licensed to make these experiments, and when the experiments
were painful and not done under anaesthetics, that he should keep
a record of them, and be prepared to report what he had done ;
and then the authority granting the license might, from their own
knowledge and by consultation, restrain him from prosecuting ob-
jectionable experiments " (583).

G. M. HuMPHEY, Professor of Anatomy in the Univer-
sity of Cambridge :

Thinks that " by limitations and restrictions you to some extent
take away responsibility and mar good feeling " (672).

H. W. AcLAND, M.D., F.RS., Eegius Professor of Medicine
in the University of Oxford :

" I should much doubt whether the best judges of what vivi-
sections should be performed would not be either the heads of the
chief departments of science, or some scientific body, or somebody
nominated by them for the purpose (930). If the Commission
collects evidence which shows that the scientific men of England
are careless and wanton, then I say that we deserve the humiliation
of being looked after by the police, but I think it will not turn out
so" (948).

Sir William Feegusson, Bart., Serjeant Surgeon to the
Queen :

" There might be an opinion expressed on the subject by the
great authorities in the country, but I should be very reluctant to
coerce scientific men to give up their investigations" (1057).
Thinks it would be a most offensive thing to men of science in
this country if a particular officer should be directed to attend
on every occasion when such experiments were made (1058).
Thinks the suggestion of licensing very questionable (1061). It
has occurred to him, as regards large institutions, that it might be
a very good rule to make^ to put them under the obligation to

Legislation. 41

make a public report of the experiments they were performing
(1142). Has thought that "it would be quite possible that you
should have an inspector of these experiments, just as they have an

inspector of anatomy so they should be able to send men

who might say, * I should like to see the number of dogs and
rabbits or cats about this place.* I think that would. have a very
wholesome effect*' (1145).

Alfred Swayne Taylor, M.D., F.E.S., Lecturer on Medi-
cal Jurisprudence and Toxicology at Guy*s Hospital :

Thinks "that legislation to be effectual should in some way or other
define the animals or class of animals " (to be used for vivisection),
and that a person might be appointed to aid the opinion of a
magistrate in deciding a case (1185). If Licenses are granted, as
under the Anatomical Act, it would be very easy to secure a power
of control over experiments (1186).

George Eolleston, M.D., Linacre Professor of Anatomy
and Physiology at Oxford :

Thinks "the present wholesome condition of public opinion is this,
that for class demonstrations limitations undoubtedly should be im-
posed, and that those limitations should render painful experimenta-
tions illegal before classes. I am loth to say anything about interfer-
ence with original research, firstly, because I think it impossible so
to interfere with it (1291). My impression of the English nation is
tl^at it is a law-abiding nation, and that a pronunciamento on the side
of carefulness, even as regarded private practice of vivisection, would
have its effect (1303). ... I think so, on the principle that Mr.
Froude lays so much weight upon, about embodying the public
opinion in the permanent form of legislation. It, so to say, crystal-
lizes it into a solid basis, which serves as a stepping-stone in the
evolution of moral sensibility upwards (1304). I think, in addition
to a Register, Inspection of some kind is a thing which is desirable "
(1319).

John Simon, F.RS. (Medical OfiBcer of the Privy Council
and of the Local Government Board) :

"Supposing that (a construction he has offered) to bo a right
construction of the Act (12 & 13 Vict., c. 92), I do not see what
more should be wanted ; but if that is not a right construction of
the Act, I should not myself see the least objection to a statutory
declaration in some such sense" (1386). Thinks that "it would be
a sham security to limit these experiments to special places and
persons, and subjecting them to inspection, compared with that

42 Appendix.

which already exists (1488). On the contrary, if it were so con-
structed as to be a real security, it would probably interfere with
work to a degree that would oblige workers to take refuge in other
countries (1489). . . . You are proposing that physiologists shall
be treated as a dangerous class, that they shall be licensed and
regulated like publicans and prostitutes " (1491). Thinks Playfair's
Bill "would give facilities for the persecution of physiologifits. The
Commission will recognize how easy it would be, if this Bill became
law, for some one to move in Parliament for a return, under section
5 of clause 3, with regard to all experiments which had been made ;
that is to say, to convert the law into means of popular attack on
individual physiologists" (1509).

Mr. JofiN CoLAM (Secretary of the Eoyal Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) handed to the Com-
mission a Bill prepared by the above Society, and stated:

The 9th section of the Bill provides " that no person shall per-
form, or cause to be performed, or take part in performing, any
vivisection upon any animal without having first of all subjected
such animal to the influence of an anaesthetic, so as to render it
wholly insensible to pain." The next sectign provides " that no
person who shall perform, or cause to be performed, or take part in
performing, any vivisection upon an animal so subjected as afore-
said, shall omit to destroy such animal before the effect of the anaes-
thetic ceases" (1526).

Da\ Arthue de Noe Walkee, formerly Military SurgecJn,
now practising Physician in London :

" I would propose that no person should be allowed to perform
experiments on living animals without legal permission from some
competent authority. Exceptions should be made in forensic cases
where the analyst might find it necessary at once to test suspected
matter on some animal. Secondly, the number of animals allowed
yearly to each licensed experimenter should be limited. I think if
this is not done, it will invalidate any other restriction that can be
thought o£ The third provision would be, that evel*y licensed
experimenter should send in every year to the same competent
authority two returns, one showing the nature of the experiments
he intends to perform, tlio other the results obtained by those
experiments. This return should also show whether anaesthetics
were used, how long the animal remained insensible, and how long
it was kept alive (1729). Finally, vivisections for demonstrations
should be entu*ely abolished (1731). The legislative means which
I suggest would rather promote science than the contrary. A gi^eat

Legislation. 43

many experiments which are performed in one laboratory are not
known in others ; and if there were returns constantly sent in, one
experimenter would easily compare his experiments with others,
faults would be detected, and the number of victims much dimi-
nished (1735). Probably no control would be efficient that was
not the result of the united judgment of a Board composed of phy-
siologists, an equal number of physicians, surgeons and pathologists ;
and even a chemist might give valuable suggestions" (1773).
(Asked, " You incHne to institute a sort of Board of Control for
scientific experimentation 1") "Yes ; on every kind of experiments
on living animals" (1774; see also 1796, 1797, 1800).

Lawson Cape, M.D., formerly practising Physician in
London :

Would not allow vivisection in the case of highly organized
animals (1822). Ought to be guarded by certain regulations
(1826).

Eev. Samuel Haughton, M.D., Fellow of T.C.D., D.C.L,

F.RS., Medical Eegistrar of the School of Physic in the

University of Dublin :

Objects to the provision in Dr. Lyon Playfair's Bill authorizing
the Presidents of the Colleges of Surgeons or Physicians to give
certificates to vivisectors. " I have no confidence in those gentle-
men at alL" Also to clause 8, wherein the license under the Act
shall extend to assistant. " It would introduce the practice of vivi-
section among the students ; and I believe it is intended to be the
result of it in any Medical School, that the person holding the
license should really be very lightly responsible for what was done
(1881). It occurs to me that if we availed ourselves of the services
of the Inspector of Anatomy as one of two inspectors, and let the
public appoint another, we should have every guarantee that is
necessary. If the Eoyal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals would not undertake it, I believe that local zeal would
undertake it, and would appoint a colleague who should be elected
by the town, who would be a lay person, and who would protect
the public feeling, which is as much entitled to be considered as the
feelmgs of animals in the question (1886). I wish to express that
opinion very strongly, that the control (of viviscctional experi-
ments) should be partly under the direct influence of public
opinion" (1969).

Mr. Garrod, Prosector to the Zoological Society :

Thinks that original research in the hands of competent persons
should be left entirely unfettered (1981), and does not feel that any

44 Appendix.

restriction is required in the direction (of incompetent persons),
because the existing law . . . would include all cases (1982).

P. H. Pye-Smith, M.D., Assistant Physician to Guy's
Hospital :

" Should have thought that until abuses were proved, legislation
was unnecessary;** and is " not aware of any necessity for it" (2042).

F. W. Pavy, M.D., F.RS., Physician to Guy's Hospital
and Lecturer on Physiology :

Felt, on looking through Dr. Playfair's Bill, that it would not
restrict the course he was himself pursuing (2185).

J. BuRDON Sanderson, M.D., F.RS., Professor of Human
Physiology in University College, London :

Is willing, speaking generally, to coincide in the proposals made
by Dr. Playfair to the House of Commons (2293). Would like to
make this statement with reference to legislation in general : that
so far as the institutions to which he has referred (like those of
Guy's Hospital and Trinity College, Cambridge) are concerned,
legislation is certainly not necessary, because there is no influence
which legislation could exercise of a beneficial character which is
not already exercised by the organization under which they are
placed (2311). Cannot see any objection to the principle of a
License, but cannot see that any Inspection is possible. Thinks, as
regards keeping a list of the animals, that it would be impossible to
carry it out with any good result (2352). Does not object to pub-
licity, but to an Inspector (2356). Thinks that legislation is not
necessary with relation to organized physiological research, and knows
no reason for thinking it necessary on any other ground (2687).

Michael Foster, M.D., F.RS., Praelector of Physiology
in Trinity College, Cambridge :

Has no objection to legislative interference. Only disagrees with
Dr. Sanderson so far as he thought it desirable or necessary (2321).
Objects to legislation, not on the ground of any mischief that
reasonable legislation would introduce, but that it is in this country
unnecessary. Thinks that there would be even for physiology some
advantages in legislation (2348).

John Anthony, M.D., formerly Assistant to Sir Charles
Bell :

Thinks experiments on living animals should be permitted in the
form of giving a License to properly qualified persons, with stringent

Legislation. 45

regulations attached, involving facility for inspection by proper
officials. That no public demonstration of vivisectional experiments
should be permitted (2444). That it should be one of the condi-
tions of the licenses that the laboratory should be open at all times
for inspection by proper officials, persons who would not care about
the scientific work, but simply take care that the thing should be
carried on in conformity with regulations laid down (2453). Would
make the license annual, or for some definite period (2507).

William Eutheefoed, M.D., Professor of the Institutes
of Medicine and Physiology in the University of Edin-
burgh :

Considered Dr. Playfair's Bill "extremely objectionable" (2877).
" Should much have preferred Lord Henniker's Bill if there had
been legislation on the subject" (2882). Was once under the im-
pression that it had been "drawn up by the Anti-Yivisection party"
(2873), at which time he considered that " it would have made no
essential change in the conduct of the physiological department of
this University. On reconsidering the Bill he considers it an
"inconvenient thing" for the power of granting a license to be
vested in the Secretary of State. Would not object to vest that
power in the Councils of the Eoyal Societies or of the Colleges of
Surgeons and Physicians, under whose jurisdiction the Inspector of
Anatomy might act (2874), provided that his reports are to be sub-
mitted to them and not to the Secretary of State (2883). Would
not object to a record of all experiments (2886).

William Tuknee, M.B., Professor of Anatomy in the
University of Edinburgh :

Has difficulties in the way of legislation in the matter. . . In what
sense are you to employ the words " live animal "1 To give a defi-
nition of life has been a difficulty from the time of Aristotle (3Q48).
Vivisection is not exclusively confined to men of science ; lambs'
tails are cut off, &c. (3050). There is another difficulty, that when
legislative checks are enacted, the progress of discovery in science is
likely to be impeded (3055), and thinks it would be class legisla-
tion of a most offensive and objectionable kind (3102).

James Ceichton Beowne, M.D., Head of the West-
Eiding Lunatic Asylum :

Thinks Inspection would be impracticable, but not onerous, or in
any way likely to interfere with the progress of science in his labo-
ratory (3219), and would wish to have some legal authority for what
we might be doing (3220). A legal remedy which would secure

46 Appendix,

him against being placed in an unjust position would be acceptable
to him (3224).

David Fereier, M.D., Professor of Forensic Medicine in
King*s College :

Thinks that any legislation that would retard physiological re-
search would be a discredit to this country (3252). Would say
" that it would be so extremely difficult to ascertain or to determine
who were qualified, or to frame a standard of competency to make
original research, that I believe legislation in that direction would
be injurious" (3253). Has no objection to some restriction being
put upon unqualified persons experimenting in this way, provided a
sound criterion be established of the abHity to perform experiments
(3262). Should certainly object to inspection of any kind on his
experiments. " I think it is possible that the method which has
been suggested of giving a license to those who are qualified to
perform experiments, a license simply, without any inspection or
the necessity of keeping a record, would not interfere to any great
extent with the development of original research" (3272).

George Hoggan, M.B., formerly Demonstrator of Ana-
tomy at Surgeon's Hall, and Teacher of Anatomy at
Minto House, Edinburgh :

Is not prepared at present to advocate the total abolition of
Vivisection (3436). " The conditions which I should like to see
if it continued, would be those in which all that was done might
be made amenable to public opinion, so that all that was good in
vivisection might be utilized, and all the abuses connected with
it might be put a stop to" (3439). (In reply to the request to
state in detail what he would recommend should be done, read
as follows) : " First, all secret or private physiological experiments
involving the infliction of pain or wounds upon animals to be abso-
lutely forbidden by law under heavy penalties, involving imprison-
ment. Secondly, all physiological experiments necessitating wound-
ing or infliction of pain upon animals to be conducted in a suitable
hall fitted with the necessary tables and apparatus for practising
vivisection. The area of the hall thus provided to be overlooked
by a gallery, or galleries, into which the public could have unre-
strained access by separate doors. This would offer the following
advantages, (a.) All experimenters claiming to be humane in
their practice of vivisection would thus enable the public to form a
correct estimate of their pretensions. (6.) As the public would not
be admitted into the area, there could be no inconvenience to
experimenters from crowding round tables or acts of mistaken zeal
or feeling, (c.) The public mind and conscience accused at present

Legislation. 47

of exaggerations would thus be afforded an opportunity of calming
and rectifying itself, if no cruelty or other abuses were to be wit-
nessed, (d) Any abuse or act of cruelty might be witnessed by
the public, and the guilty party prosecuted and punished at their
instance, (e.) The animals on which experiments were being tried
would be protected from cruelty by the presence of the public.
(/.) Experimenters would be forced to be on their guard against
£Qlowing any cruelty or even the appearance of it. They would
thus be rendered more thoughtful of the sentient being under
experiment, and would therefore resort to vivisection only when
such seemed necessary or advisable for the elucidation or proof
of some important fact. (^.) Any person might have the power
of experimenting there, without special license or qualification,
under the charge of the superintendent of the institution, who,
except on the proof of a conviction for cruelty, could refuse
admission to none while any table or place remained vacant or
unused. (^.) Any student of medicine wishing to make a speciality
of physiology could acquire a useful knowledge of this science from
the gallery, whence he could watch every step in the operation
of preparing for and performing the experiment. This is an advan-
tage which cannot be obtained in the best organized classes in
the world, and is of primary importance, (t.) Any of the stu-
dents seen in the gallery might be asked to assist in the area at
any experiment by any of the operators. The number of such
assistants to be limited (say to five), so as not to inconvenience
neighbouring experimenters, or permit the place to be converted
into a class-room for witnessing demonstrations upon animals.
This measure would benefit the three parties, as an extra assistant
might enable the anaesthesia to be kept perfect, while by closer
observance the student would learn better, and the operator would
have his hands set free for his more special part. (/.) For a like
reason, the number of persons in the gallery ought also to be
limited, say to ten, of whom only five might be medical students ;
all admission therein to be by tickets issued gratis by the superin-
tendent to all respectable persons above the age of eighteen who
might apply for them, something like a reading ticket for the
British Museum. (A:.) For the benefit of the students, or the
information of the visitor, a placard containing notes of the case to
be hung in the gallery opposite the experiment to which it refers.
The anaesthetic, the course of operati(m, and the design aimed at, to
be fully stated therein by the operator. This card to be held as
the card giving admission to the operator into the area, and to
be retained and filed afterwards by the superintendent ; like the
card case hung over a patient's bed in some hospitals. (Z.) It has
been objected that no discoveries in science could be prosecuted in
such a place, as they would become known before the discoverer

48 Appendix.

published them, and thus he would lose the coveted fame ; and
that consequently such discoverers would be discouraged from
, using the institution. This is possibly the best argument that
could be offered in favour of such a plan, as, while habitual or
dilettante vivisectors would be discouraged, all earnest workers for
the good of humanity would not hesitate to work openly in it at
any experiment necessary to establish some important or beneficial
truth, (m.) Animals on which it is intended to study the course of
disease shall after inoculation, or operation in the hall, be retained
in premises connected with and attached to the institution. These
shall also be freely accessible to the public. No animal suffering
from very painful wounds to be allowed to live, and if in the course
of any induced disease the animal appears to suffer greatly, it shall
be destroyed at once ; and any neglect to do so shall constitute an
act of cruelty for which the owner primarily — failing whom the
superintendent — shall be held responsible, (w.) Any person or
corporate body to be at liberty to form or build such an establish-
ment, for which, after it has been inspected by an officer of Govern-
ment, a license or permit gratis, or at a nominal fee, shall be issued,
giving power to keep open the same under charge of a superin-
tendent, who shall be held responsible for any irregularity or
cruelty which may occur, along with but after the person com-
mitting the offence. He shall grant by the afore-mentioned card
admittance to use the area to any respectable person, and retain the
same afterwards as a record of the operation. Admission to be
granted on payment of certain stipulated fees for hourly^ daily, or
weekly use of the place, (o.) In this establishment all wounding
of animals calculated to cause much pain under normal conditions
to be effected only while the animal is fully under the influence of
some anaesthetic or narcotic, and thereby rendered insensible to
pain. You will observe that this does not include the whole of an
experiment, but only that portion in which pain is being inflicted
by some preliminary operation. (2?.) Curari, or its supposed
physiological analogues, is never to be used during wounding of or
upon wounded animals during any experiment, (g.) Lastly, ex-
periments should be strictly limited to the less sensitive and intel-
ligent animals, and it should be prohibited to vivisect horses,
monkeys, dogs, and cats. I recommend no special alteration in the
law regarding Cruelty to Animals" (3441). "If there be a strong
objection on the part of physiolo,c;ists to allow any restrictions to be
laid upon them, then I would take total abolition as the next best
thing " (4063). " If a license \vas to be looked upon as a restric-
tion, without being a protection to animals, that should be laid
aside " (4082). " I am of opinion that demonstrations in class by
means of painful experiments on animals should be absolutely for-
bidden by law under heavy penalties. Then, further, I should like

Legislation. 49

to express an opinion on the question of limiting permission to per-
form painful experiments in connection with new discoveries only.
I think this would be unsatisfactory, because while theoretically it
would seem to be a safe precaution, practically it would bo of no
use whatever, as any experiments might be made to bear the desired
interpretation" (424^.

John Geay McKendrick, M.D., Lecturer on Physiology

in the Extra- Academical School of Edinburgh :

Scarcely sees how any legislation would have any distinct bene-
ficial effect (3955). Does not see any great objection to licensing
persons, not special places nor special investigations (3957, 3958).
Has a private laboratory (3960). "Would certainly object to legis-
lation which should compel every person engaged in physiological
research to go to some public and licensed laboratory for the pur-
pose of making his experiments (3963).

Joseph Lister, M.B., Professor of Clinical Surgery in the

University of Edinburgh :

Should feel it a very doubtful matter whether any legislative
interference could take place that would not hamper in an undesir-
able manner such investigations (4299). Thinks legislation would
bo not only superfluous, but personally should feel it as a sort
of blot upon our profession, as implying that such legislation was
necessary (4345). No advantage can possibly be derived that he
can see by the public witnessing these things (4348). Cannot
imagine what object there would be in excluding the domestic
animals, dogs, cats, and horses, from such experiments (4421).

Egbert McDonnell, M.D., Surgeon to Steeven's Hos-
pital, Dublin :

Sees immense dif&culties in practical legislation (4475). Tliinks
that the position of the physiologists would be improved by legisla-
tion. Would, as a physiologist, like some legislation to save the
physiologist from the outcry that has been raised by misstatements
and exaggerations. Thinks it would be desirable for the physiolo-
gist to have the protection which would arise from disarming the
suspicions of the public (4476). Does not think that either of the
two Bills brought forward last year would very well meet the case
(4477). Finds great difiiculties with regard to a system of inspec-
tion — between inspection being a mere sham, and being of a kind
to interfere with the progress of science (4478).

John Clela^nd, M.D., Professor of Physiology and Ana-
tomy, Galway :
Thinks no further restraint is required than that provided by the

D

50 Appendix.

Cruelty to Animals Act. Cannot see any reason for legislation on
the subject (4620). Did not know the Cruelty Acts only apply to
domestic animals (4621). Sees no objection to widening the pre-
sent Act to include all mammals (4625).

Charles Darwin, Esq. :

Cordially approved of the Kesolutions of the British Association
in 1871 (4664). Took some part in the steps preparatory to Dr.
Playfair's Bill ; but the Bill did not exactly express the conclusions
at which, after consultation with several physiologists, we arrived;
but approved it in the main (4665).

Francis Sibson, M.D., F.RS., Consulting Physician to
St. Mary's Hospital :

Is not fond of restrictions. Thinks that in this country we get
on far better by being governed by our own conscience, our own
sense of what is right, and public opinion. Thinks those are far
better rules than any minute rules that may be laid down, such as
would interfere, perhaps, with some of the happiest lines of research
that have ever been undertaken, and put a stop to most important
investigations (4690). Does not object to the Act for preventing
Cruelty to Animals (4692). If there were abuses, would not object
to a law for their correction (4693). But is not at all of opinion
that such abuses do exist to a sufficient extent as to require legal
interference (4694). If any legislative measure were adopted which
would seriously impede the demonstrative teaching of physiology,
he would consider it an evil, a turning back of the student into the
old paths which we now feel to be no longer tenable (4711). Has
never found any English physiologist advocate the doctrine that the
animal should only be anaesthetized for the physiologist's own con-
venience, irrespective of the relief of suffering to the animal (4718).
If such a doctrine obtained any footing in this country, would merit
repression by legislative interference. If it did come, it must be
repressed (4720).*

John Mallet Purser, M.D., Professor of Institutes of

Medicine, Trinity College, Dublin :

Considers the matter a very unsuitable subject for legislation
(4808). Thinks teachers of physiology are, the most competent
judges of what should be done (4810). Has an impression that aU
professors will be humane and all students will abstain from expe-
rimenting ; and his impression on that point is so strong, that he
thinks legislation would be quite unnecessary, and would do more
harm than good (482d).

* Vide Evidence of Dr. Emanuel Klein, pp. 61 seq.

Legislation. 5 1

Aethue Gamgee, KD., F.E.S., Brackenbury Professor of
Physiology, O'wens* College, Manchester :

Thmks that in reference to physiological labomtories there is no
need for any legislation. Is, however, on principle, quite prepared
to say that it might be advisable to restrain the possible perform-
ance of vivisection by persons not competent (5376). Thinks that
students should be entirely disqualified from performing any expe-
riment (5378). Can conceive that a system of licenses could bo
introduced which would not he prejudicial to science, if no vexa-
tious interference were exercised (5381). Asked, "Whether, if
some regulation were proposed which should, without limiting the
progress of science and the efforts of competent scientific people,
restrain the performance of operations on living animals by incom-
petent persons for no definite object and without proper precautions,
there would be any sentiment on your part that you had been
affronted by such a regulation?" Answers, "Not at all" (5425).

Geoege James Allman, M.D., F.RS,, Emeritus Professor
of Natural History, Edinburgh, President of the Lin-
nsean Society :

Thinks Dr. Lyon Playfair's Bill on the whole a good one ; that
there are some points on which it might be improved ; but thinks it
very much better than that brought in by Lord Hartismere (5440).
Attaches importance to keeping a register of air proceedings with
regard to living animals (5441). Says that he should almost feel
inclined to suggest the appointment of a Board of Control. Thinks
that if physiological experiments are tried in license^ places, inspec-
tion should be allowed, and that a Board should be 'appointed with
a power of visiting and seeing that there' was no abu&e (5457).

Sir William Withey Gull, Bart., M.Di, Consulting

Physician to Guy's Hospital, late FuUerton Professor

of Physiology at the Eoyal Institute :

If legislation were calculated to hamper either scientific inquiry
or the pursuit of science, would think it most deplorable (5472).
" Even if it were clear of that objection, I should see a moral and
very serious objection. It would imply that the scientific men of
this country and the students of science required legislation, which
I deny (5473). I have thought a good deal on the question how
far any possible legislation would not throw a shadow upon the fair
prospects of science, and I feel this, that as all legislation must
hamper and must hinder, which all legislation is intended for,
because it is intended to restrict, such restriction where it was
necessary might fairly, and might I am sure^ as regards public

d2

52 Appendix.

morals and public decency, be left to the high sense of the teachers
or the students of science and the public ; that whatever legislation
could do would be repressive, and would be a distinct asssumption
that there was a public scanda> in a certain way, limited more or
less, but still a public scandal calling for legislation ; because legis-
lation could only be called for if there were such a scandal, and
the prevalence of it were sufficient for legislation. Now I must
say that with my personal knowledge and long experience, both
in public and private life, from living at a hospital for fifteen
years, being acquainted with one of the greatest schools in this
country, having been occupied with physiology for fourteen years
of my life, and having a full acquaintance with medical men and
medical students, and with the difficulties that science has to
contend against, and looking at the whole subject, I should regard
any legislation as repressive or hampering, or as casting a shadow
where it is not deserved. There may be isolated cases of abuse, but
I doubt even that ; I doubt whether anybody but a madman would
seek to inflict pain for the pleasure of it ; I do not know of such
cases. I should regard it as an evil day for this country if the
Parliament of England should think itself called upon to interfere
(5475). I should regard it as throwing a shadow, as I have said,
upon our fair fame, which fair fame should not, I think, receive
such a blot. Moreover, I think there is such a tendency to igno-
rance ; there is such a tendency to be satisfied with the knowledge
we now have; there is such a desire to be governed by what I
should call weak sentiment — I do not speak unfairly or unkindly,
but there is such a desire, that I am sure that even the mildest
legislation would do harm to the progress of science ; not to the
progress of science in a higher sense, because I think it would not
hinder the scientific men of this country from pursuing their in-
quiries ; but I think it would prevent the spread of scientific know-
ledge amongst students, who are already too glad to get their
knowledge out of books " (5476).

William Benjamin Carpentee, C.B., M.D., Registrar of
London University :

As far as he understood the details (of Dr. Playfair's Bill),
there would be, to his apprehension, very grave difficulties in
working it effectually. For instance, he could not see how it could
exclude or take cognizance of the performance of physiological
experiments in private houses, or how it was possible to draw any
definite line between the performance of an experiment that no
sensible person could object to, and the performance of a cruel and
dainful experiment " (5594).

Legislation. 53

Peter David Handysidb, M.D., F.R.S.E., Teacher of
Anatomy in the Edinburgh School of Medicine :

"Not at all opposed to legislation (5938). Would suggest
that a system of Licensing woidd afford the general public * ample
security that the practice of vivisection is nowhere being carried
on to any objectionable extent.' And the operation of that
might be, firstly, that certain students and registered practi-
tioners wishing to conduct original experiments onhj^ should be
licensed ; secondly, that teachers of anatomy, surgery, and physio-
logy may be free to repeat such an essential experiment as that
upon a frog's foot, showing it once to each of their classes; and also
be free to conduct, in private^ any original experiments under
anaesthesia, where anaesthetics can properly be used. Then the
mode of licensing should be two-fold. Firstly, two laymen, such as
justices of the peace, I think, should be required to say, * We con-
sider this party and these premises' (I would register both the indi-
vidual and his premises) ' a proper person to be entrusted with the
performance of vivisection for original experiments, or for teaching
purposes, and a proper place for that purpose.' Secondly, to ensure
that the experiments shall be original, there should be a certificate
from a public teacher of anatomy, physiology, or surgery in a school
of medicine, or in the medical faculty of a university, to testify that
* To my certain knowledge A.B. is a fit and proper person to prac-
tise vivisection under the statutory regulations* (51^40). Would
have two justices of the peace. Thinks laymen should be conjoined
with a professional expert in order to allay public disquietude (5941).
Thinks it well that lay magistrates should represent the general
public. Every teacher of anatomy must possess the Home Secre-
tary's license, countersigned by two justices of the peace ; and not
only is the teacher licensed, but the place also where ho means to
practise anatomy (5942). His plan includes three inspectors; one
for Scotland, one for England, and one for Ireland (5943). Thinks
we require to have for inspector an experienced practical surgjon,
anatomist, or physiologist. Thinks these are the only three who
usually perform such experiments (5944). Would give the inspec-
tor power to see that the Act is properly carried out. This power
would run parallel to that of the inspector of anatomy. His
duties are to see that there are no bodies dissected except those
that are obtained according to the provisions of the Anatomy Act of
1832 ; that no one shall offend against the provisions of that Act,
and that the Home Secretary is furnished quarterly (say, in this
case, half-yearly) with an official return (5945). Thinks that one
inspector for each division of the kingdom would be sufficient fop
this purpose of licensing the practice of vivisection" (5948).

54 Appendix.

ti^-^^d-^m

Edwaed S. Crisp, M.D., practising Physician in London :

Thinks that with regard to our hospitals a committee should be
formed at each hospital, who should regulate and control these
matters, and that all useless experiments on animals oft repeated
should be done away with (6157).

James Madbn Holt, M.P. :

Says, " I come to the conclusion that Parliament would do well
to abolish the practice altogether, and forbid it under heavy penal-
ties '* (6176).

Geoege Henry Lewes, Esq. :

" Would look with great jealousy upon anything like a definite
restriction (6343).

George Eichard Jesse, Esq. :

" Any scheme for permitting and then * regulating ' scientific
cruelties, the Society for the AboKtion of Vivisection deems to be
doing evil in the fallacious hope that good may come; and it
denounces strongly all legislation that will license cruelty under
whatever pretence, or repeal in any degree the Magna Charta of
Animals, 12 <& 13 Vict., c. 92; as to do so is palpably protecting the
wrong-doer, and actually diminishing the protection to ihcanimal
creatioti which the existing laws of England afford.' The regulation
by law of cruelty is an unjustifiable and retrograde movement It
states as its conviction that the present time is premature for legis-
lation, inasmuch as the nation' is but slightly informed of the exist-
ence, extent and nature of vivisection " (6476).

For convenience of reference, and to afford the reader a
bird*s-eye view of all the more important legislative plans
before the public, the Committee here append the chief provi-
sions of the two Bills introduced last Session into Parliament.

The following are the chief provisions of the Bill introduced
in the Session of 1875 into the House of Commons by Dr.
Lyon Playfair, Mr. Spencer Walpole, and Mr. Evelyn Ashley :

1. Save ad herein-after mentioned, no person shall, for any pur-
pose whatever, make an experiment causing pain, or of a nature to
cause pain, on any live animal.

Legislation. '55

Any person acting in contravention of this section shall he guilty
of a misdemeanor, or shall be liable, on prosecution before a court
of summary jurisdiction, to a penalty not exceeding j'?/i^yj90Mwrf«, or
imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months.

2. Any person, for the purpose of new scientific discovery, but
for no other purpose, shall be permitted to make an experiment (m
a live animal of a nature to cause pain notwithstanding this Act
and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (passed in the twelfth
and thirteenth years of Her present Majesty, chapter ninety-two)>
provided that the following conditions are c6mplied with :

(1.) That the animal shall first have been made insensible by the
administration of anaesthetics or otherwise, and shall con-
tinue to be insensible during the whole of such experi-
ment; and

(2.) That, if the nature of the experiment be such as to seriously
injure the animal, so as to cause to it after-suffering, the
animal shall be killed immediately on the termination of
the experiment.

3. Nothing in this or in the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
Act contained shall be taken to prohibit any person holding a
license, as herein-after provided under this Act, from subjecting any
live animal to an experiment without the use of anaesthetics, pro-
vided that in making such experiment the following conditions are
all complied with : —

(1.) That the experiment is made for the purpose of new scientific
discovery, and for no other purpose ; and

(2.) That insensibility cannot be produced without necesswily
frustrating the object of the experiment; and that the
animal shoidd not be subjected to any pain which is not
necessary for the purpose of the experiment ; and

(3.) That the experiment be brought to an end as soon as practi-
cable; and

(4.) That if the nature of the experiment be such as to seriously
injure the animal, so as to cause to it after-suffering, the
animal shall be killed immediately on the termination of
the experiment :

(5.) That a register of all experiments made without the use of
anaesthetics shall be duly kept, and be returned in such
form and at such times as one of Her Majesty's principal
Secretaries of State may direct.

4. Any person desirous to obtain a license under this Act may
apply for the same to one of Her Majesty's principal Secretaries of
State. Such application shall be in the form set forth in the
Schedule to this Act, and shall be signed by the applicant, and
shall be accompanied by a certificate in form set forth in the same

56 . Appendix.

Schedule, and signed by one at least of the following persons 5 viz.,
the President of the Koyal Society, the Presidents of the Eoyal
Colleges of Surgeons in London, Edinburgh, or Dublin, the Presi-
dents of the Colleges of Physicians in London, Edinburgh, or Dub-
lin, and also by a professor of physiology, medicine, or anatomy in
some university in Great Britain, or recognised by the Colleges of
Surgeons and Physicians aforesaid.

Provided that if the applicant be a professor or lecturer of or in
physiology, medicine, anatomy, or surgery in any university in Great
Britain, or in any college incorporated by Royal Charter, or a pro-
fessor or lecturer in any one of such sciences employed by Govern-
ment, such a certificate shall not be required ; but, instead thereof,
his application shall be countersigned by the registrar, president,
principal, or secretary of such university or college.

5. Upon receiving such application the Secretary of State may, if
he think fit, grant to the applicant a license under this Act.

^: A license under this Act shall, unless earlier revoked, be in
force, in the case of the holder being a professor or lecturer as
herein-before mentioned, during such time as he shall continue to
hold such professorship or lectureship, and in any other case for
the term of five years. Provided that from time to time, when a
license expires, a Secretary of State shall renew the samQ upon
receiving a written application from the holder, without requiring
a fresh certificate or any countersigning of the application,

7. A Secretary of State may at any time, on cause shown, revoke
any license granted under this Act.

8. A license under this Act shall extend to any person assisting
the holder of the license, provided the person assisting acts in the
presence and under the directions of such holder.

9. All offences and penalties under this Act may be prosecuted
and recovered in manner directed by the Summary Jurisdiction
Acts before a Court of summary jurisdiction.

10. Any person who has been convicted of any offence punish-
able by tlus Act by any justices may appeal in England to the next
general or quarter sessions of the peace.

Legislation. 5 7

The following are the provisions of the Bill introduced in
the Session of 1875 into the House of Lords by Lord Hartis-
mere (Lord Henniker) :

2. It shall not be lawful, after the first day of January one thou-
sand eight hundred and seventy-six, to perform a vivisection save
in a place which is registered in pursuance of this Act.

Notice of any place in which it is intended to perform vivisections
shall be given in Great Britain to one of Her Majesty's Principal
Secretaries of State (in this Act referred to as the Secretary of
State), and in Ireland to the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant
of Ireland (in this Act referred to as the Chief Secretary), such
notice shall be signed by a member of some college of physicians or
surgeons, and shall sufficiently describe the place in respect of which
it is given ; and the Secretary of State or Chief Secretary shall
cause any place with respect to which such notice has been given,
to be entered on a register to be kept for the purposes of this Act,
in such form and under the management of such persons as the
Secretary of State and Chief Secretary may respectively direct.

An entry on the register in pursuance of this section shall con-
tinue in force for twelve months from the date thereof and no
longer; but such entry may be at any time renewed on a fresh
notice being given as required by this section.

Any person who, after the first day of January one thousand
eight hundred and seventy-six, performs a vivisection in a place
which is not registered in conformity with this section, shall be
deemed to have committed an offence against this Act.

The Secretary of State or Chief Secretary may remove any regis-
tered place from the register on its being proved to his satisfaction
that any provision of this Act has been contravened in such place.

3. Any inspector of anatomy may at any time visit and inspect
any place which is for the time being registered in pursuance of this
Act.

4. A vivisection shall not (save as herein-after mentioned), after
the first day of January one thousand eight hundred and seventy-
six, be performed on any animal until such animal has been placed
completely under the influence of an anaesthetic ; and for the pur-
poses of this section the substance called urari or curare shall not be
deemed to be an anaesthetic.

Any person may apply to the Secretary of State or Chief Secretary
for a special license to perform vivisections without the use of
anaesthetics, and the Secretary of State or Chief Secretary may, as
he thinks fit, grant or refuse such license.

58 Appendix.

There shall be paid in respect* of every such license a sum not
exceeding ten pounds, and every such license shall continue in force
for six months, and no longer.

Any person who performs a vivisection in contravention of this
section shall be deemed to have committed an offence against this
Act.

5, A justice of the peace, on information on oath thai there is
reasonable ground to believe that vivisections are performed at any
place not registered in, pursuance of this Act, may issue his warrant
authorising any officer of police to enter and search such place, and
to take the names of the persons found therein.

Any person who refuses admission on demand to a police officer
so authorised, or who obstructs such officer *in the execution of
his duty under this section, or who refuses on demand to disdose
his name and address, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding five
pounds.

6. Any person who coinmits any offence against this Act for
which no other penalty is imposed shall be liable to a penalty not
exceeding, twenty pounds;

All offences and penalties under this Act may be prosecuted and
recovered in manner directed by the Summary Jurisdiction Acts
before a court of summary jurisdiction.

The term " Summaiy Jurisdiction Acts" means as follows :

As to England, the Act of the session of the eleventh and twelfth
years of the reign of Her present Majesty, chapter forty-three,
intituled "An Act to facilitate the performance of the duties of
justices of the peace out of sessions within England and
"Wales with respect to summary convictions and orders," and
any Acts amending the same :

As to Scotland, "The Summary Procedure Act, 1864:"

As to Ireland, within the police district of Dublin metropolis, the
Acts regulating the powers and duties of justices of the peace
for such district, or of the police of such district ; and else-
where in Ireland, "The Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act, 1851,"
and any Act amending the same :

The term "court of summary jurisdiction" means in England
and Ireland any two justices of the peace or any metropolitan
stipendiary or other magistrate empowe]:ed by law to do alone
or with others any act authorised to be done by more than one
justice of the peace; and in Scotland any justice or justices of
the peace, sheriff, or other magistrate by whatever name called,
proceedings before whom for the trial or prosecution of any
offence or for the recovery of any penalty under any Act Of

Legislation. 59

Parliament, the provisions of the Summary Jurisdiction Act,
1864, may be applied :

In Scotland the following provisions shall have effect :

(1.) All jurisdiction, powers, and authorities necessary for the
court of summary jurisdiction under this Act are hereby
conferred on that court :

(2.) Every person found liable under this Act in any penalty
shall be liable in default of immediate payment to im-
prisonment for a term not exceeding three months, and
the conviction and warrant may be in the form of No. 3
of Schedule K. of the Summary Procedure Act, 1864.

»

7. In this Act, the term " vivisection " includes the cutting or
wounding, or treating with galvanism or other appliances, any living
vertebrate animal for purposes of physiological research or demon-
stration, also the artificial production in any living vertebrate animal
of painful disease for purposes of physiological research or demon-
stration.

(E.)

Extracts of Evidenoe on Sensibility and Aneesthetios.

Among the numerous illustrations to be traced throughout
the Evidence before us of the unsatisfactory nature of the
results of the thousands of experiments made by Vivisectors,
not the least striking is the absolute difference of opinion
which appears to prevail among the most eminent of them
respecting the most elementary fact which their investigations
might have ascertained, namely, the Sensibility of Animals,
and the influence upon them of various anaesthetics and nar-
cotics.

Here, for example, are Dr. Pavy and Dr. Sibson s state-
ments, tending to show that baking and starvation to death
are not very painful, only a slight discomfort.

Dr. Pavy:

"Should not think a healthy frog sufFeris very much the ex-
perience of being put into hoiling water (2159). I think we should
not feel any pain (if we were put into water, and the temperature
gradually raised to -the hoiling point). . . . The water would have
the effect of raising the temperature of the body ; and when the
temperature of the body reaches about 10 or 12 degrees above the
normal point, death ensues ; so that death would ensue long before
the animal could be sulgected to the influence of the boiliug water
(2160).

[It is respectfully suggested whether, under these new phy-
siological views, recourse ought not to be had to the old prac-
tice of boiling criminals to death, as the most humane and
painless mode of execution !]

Sensibility and Anesthetics. 6i

Dr. SiBSON:

(Asked whether he would deny that the suflfering involved in
raising the temperature of animals till they died would be very
severe ?) " That is a question that I happen to have paid a great
deal of attention to, and I am not of opinion that it would produce
great suflfering " (4745). Thinks, nevertheless, that Goltz s experi-
ment of boiling a frog to death is " a horrible idea " (4750).
(Asked whether he would say the same of Chossat's experiments of
starving animals to death, that very little suflfering was involved in
these experiments ?) " I am very familiar with these experiments ;
I have been over them again and again, and I would say the very
same of those, that there was very little suflfering inflicted on those
animals by the process of starvation which they were subjected to
by Chossat" (4751). (Asked whether, supposing that urari is in no
respect an anaesthetic, he would say that a painful operation, lasting
half-an-hour, and followed by experiments, in which the bile-ducts
are acted upon by medicines during eight and a half hours more,
wo^^d be very painful or not?) "I do not think they would be
very painful " (4760). (Asked whether the earlier stages of starva-
tion are not painful V) says, " I do not know. There must be some
discomfort undoubtedly ; but it is a very slight discomfort, I
imagine" (4787). (Asked whether, when sailors are exposed to
starvation by loss of their vessel, he considers their suflferings only
amount to cQscomfort or inconvenience and do not merit the name
of extreme pain X) answers, " I should say so, certainly " (4789).

Dr. Walker, on the contrary, testifies not only to the pain
of the animals under starvation, but to the hardening eflfect on
experimenters of making such experiments :

" I can only repeat what I have said just now, that Nature will
not suspend her laws to please me or any particular individual, or
any particular theory, and that vivisectors are not exempt from the
law of habit. I can bring you two or three cases to prove the
hardening eflfect of habit. An observation, which first brought to
my notice the hardening eflfect of habit, both moral and physical, is
this. I used to dine very often with a lecturer on physiology, and
one night I found that I could not enjoy either my cigar or my
dinner, because the day before we had gone through the laboratory,
and I could not get rid of the imploring look of the dogs which
hoped for some food every time that .they saw a human being, the
patient suflfering of the fowls, and of the desperate efforts made by
some rabbits to allay the pangs of hunger with anything to engage
the digestion ; and it appeared to me that my friend was indiffer-
ent. He had been a vivisector some years ; I was a beginner -'
4908).

62 Appendix.

Dr. Pbitchard says :

" I have performed some thousands of operations on animals (as a
veterinary surgeon), and I have never yet been able to detect any dif-
ference in sensation between the skin of either one or the other and
the human subject beyond this, that the cuticle is thicker in some
animals than in others, and of course the knife has to penetrate
deeper to reach the sensitive structure; but when once it has
reached the sensitive, I think it is as sensitive in the one animal as
the other" (846).

Mr. SwAYNE Taylor :

^' A dog experiences the effects of poison (of all animals) most
like a human being. "The doses of* poison for a middle-sized dog
are similar to those which will act on a human being ; the symp-
toms of suffering are really very much the same (1202). There
is something very dreadful in the operation of strychnine upon an
animal. Ko doubt it suffers agonizing pain '' (1219).

Dr. Simon :
"Has no doubt as to the frog's fall sensibility to pain" (1499).

But Dr. Lister :

" Does not believe that the sufferings of the frog are worthy of
serious consideration " (4420).

Dr. Anthony:

"Thinks you might fairly take the amount of intelligence as
almost the measure of sensation !' (2598).

But Dr. EuTHERFORD says :
" It is wonderful what you may do to a sheep-dog without the
animal making any commotion" (2871).

Again : Throughout a large part of this evidence, and gene-
rally in aU. apologies for vivisection, the use of ansesthetics is
brought prominently forward, as if they annihilated the pain
of the animal, and even the most prolonged and seemingly
frightful experiments were rendered wholly painless. Many
incidental statements and admissions, however, justify the
remark in Dr. Hoggan's letter to the Morning Post last
spring, that anaesthetics "prove far more eflScacious in
lulling public feeling towards the vivisectors than pain in
the vivisected" (4108) ;. and Dr. Walker's statement before the
Commission:

Sensibility and A ncesthetics. 63

" When an experimenter says, as ia said in a recent publication,
that ' before and throughout these experiments anaesthetics were
used,' it is perfectly true \ but if by that you choose to understand
that while the animal lived and was experimented on he W6is in-
sensible, it is the greatest delusion that ever was" (1810).

Sir J. Paget :

^ Physiological experiments may be done under anaesthesia, but
if the anaesthetic is not well given the animal gets out of its influ-
ence (350). The end of that course of observations was to find out
that we have no certain means by which the fatal effects of chloro-
form can be prevented. I believe that from twenty to thirty per-
sons die of the effects of chloroform every year in the British Island
alone (380).

Dr. Pmtchard tells us, that

" Chloroform poisons the blood of a horse ; has to be adminis-
tered in very large quantities (794). I should never think of
applying chloroform to dogs at all. They appear for some time not
to be under the influence of it at all, and then suddenly they come
under the influence of it, and we find it impossible to bring them
round (798). Would use it on a cat " (801).

Dr. Crichton Brown :

"The sacrifice of animals was twenty-nine, and of these five
l^nimals died before they were touched, from the effects of the anaes-
thetic, showing that it was carefully given" (3178).

The practice of these eminent gentlemen is as various as
their theories. Dr. Schafer avows that he never admini-
sters anaesthetics to frogs (3797). Dr. McDonnel boasts that
he always does so. Dr. Cleland honestly confesses, "It
never occurred to me to apply an anaesthetic to a frog"
(4615). In brie^ no rule appears to prevail, either in theory
or practice, on a matter whereon must hinge the question
of whether an immense mass of experiments are wholly pain*
less (and morally blameless), or whether they involve the
double torment, the hypercesthesia, which some of the highest
authorities have aflSrmed they produce. A remark of Dr.
Swayne Taylor seems unintentionally to exhibit the scientific
men of Europe much in the aspect of school-boys playing
with weapons of which they understand neither the use nor
nature.

64 Appendix.

Dr. SwAYNE Taylor :

" I should doubt wliether the muscles are not affected through
the nerves (under curare), but it depends on whether you use the
curare extract or the alkaloid called curarina, I believe there is not
a grain of the alkaloid in this country. I have only the curare
extract, and that is a preparation made by the American Indians —
we do not exactly know how, and we are not quite sure whether it
is always made the same way (1192). The alkaloid no doubt would
destroy sensation; the other thing, the curare, might or might not ;
its effects are variable" (1244).

Mr. ScHAFER says :

" We do not know what anaesthetic to apply to frogs. We do
not know that the anaesthetic would not give as much pain as the
operation itself" (3797).

Dr. Gamgee, r.E.S., goes so far as to question whether
even the decapitation of a frog puts an end to all sensibility
to suffering :

" There are innumerable facts which make it almost certain that
if a person were decapitated, the head would not feeL Xow it is
conceivable that things may be different in cold-blooded animals.
Their tissues are capable of living for a longer time when deprived
of blood, and therefore I have always been in the habit, after
decapitating the head of a frog, of at once crushing the head"
(5414).

Dr. Cleland :

Asked, " Have you ever considered how far frogs can be anaes-
thetised?" — "I have tried to make up my mind how far the frog
feels at all, and I own that I have not come to any conclusion on
the subject" (4614).

(P.)

Extracts of Evidence concerning Foreigrn Physiologists.

1^,^ —

As an illustration of the reasons for alarm at the importa-
tion of foreign teachers, and the influence of foreign example
in English physiological laboratories, attention is respectfully
called to the following extracts from the evidence of Dr.
Emanuel Klein, the only foreigner examined by the Com-
mission. Two others were recently established in this coun-
try, namely, M. Vignal, assistant to Dr. Eutherford in his
celebrated experiments in Edinburgh, and M. Dupuy, a French
vivisector, who (it would appear from the questions of the
Commission to Dr. Burdon Sanderson) was appointed Lecturer
on Physiology at the London School of Medicine for Women,
but resigned his oflfice when the lady students objected to
attend at his vivisectional experiments (2792). Dr. Klein,
however, as above stated, was alone examined by the Eoyal
Commission, who in their Eeport give the following account of
the duplicate appearance of his evidence in their Blue Book :

"Dr. Emanuel Klein, assistant professor at the laboratory of the
Brown Institution, lecturer on general histology at St. Bartholo-
mew's Hospital, gave evidence before us. Dr. Klein has acted in
the investigations which have been conducted under the medical
officer of the Privy Council, and is author of the first part of the
Handbook to which wo shall have to refer. The proof of his
evidence was sent to him in the usual course for his corrections.
This he returned with alterations which appeared to us to be
so much at variance with the letter and spirit of the answers he had
given us at his examination, that we felt ourselves unable to receive
them as an authentic report of his evidence. In consequence of
this refusal he has requested permission to withdraw the evidence.

E

66 Appendix.

We have thought that this course would not be right, and we have
included in the minutes the shorthand writer's note as it was origi-
nally taken, and have given in the Appendix the amended proof
submitted to us, with the correspondence on the subject."

The following facts must be borne in mind to understand
the importance of this revelation of the principles and tone of
feeling of foreign physiologists.

Dr. Klein has been engaged for four years as Assistant in
the Brown Institute (3688), a humane foundation intended
for the relief and cure of the diseases of animals, but
where it now appears more animals are kept for painful ex-
periments than are kept for cure (2815, 2816). He came
direct from Vienna (3689), and has been since associated with
Dr. Burdon Sanderson, not only at the Brown Institute, but
also with him and Dr. Brunton and Dr. Michael Foster in the
composition of the Handbook of the Physiological Laboratory,
He has been entrusted by Mr. Simon (Medical Officer to the
Privy Council, who has the expenditure of the annual grant of
£2000 for scientific purposes) with making certain pathological
investigations on animals ; and it appears that Mr. Simon gave
him only " general instructions '* on the subject, and did not
convey to him the rule laid down in Mr. Forster's Minute,
"that in any severely painful operation chloroform is to be
administered for any experiment connected with the Privy
Council" (3650). Finally, Dr. Klein holds the appointment
of Lecturer on General Histology at the Medical School of
St. Bartholomew's Hospital. Carrying these J^cts with us,
Dr. Klein's candid avowals appear to cast painful light on the
statements of some English physiologists and their advocates
concerning foreign scientific education ; as, for example, Dr.
Burdon Sanderson's remark, that he "wishes to see the type of
education here more like the type of education in Germany "
(2732) ; Dr. Gamgee's eulogium on Professor Ludwig, of.
Leipsic, who, he is " certain, is as cautious in the performance
of any experiment on a living animal as any English physio-
logist that ever lived, and who has been the teacher of nearly

Foreign Physiologists. • 67

•

all the physiologists in Europe, and has indoctrinated nearly
the whole of them in the methods of physiological inquiry "
(5418); and, finally, Mr. Simon*s testimony to the "kindness"
of Dr. Burden Sanderson and Dr. Klein when interrogated,
"Whether he did not think that the habit of regarding animals
as a mere battery of vital forces on which particular results
are to be studied, necessarily to a certain extent produces the
efifect of diminishing the sympathy with their sufferings ?" —
" I think not," said Mr. Simon. " I do not know anywhere a
kinder person than Dr. Burden Sanderson " (1 476). " Or than
Dr. Klein, for instance?" asked the Commission. "I have
no reason," said Mr. Simon, "to think otherwise of him '
(1477).

These, then, in brief, are the views and practice of a gentle-
man invited to assist English physiologists, and to instruct
the students in St. Bartholomew's Hospital, and charged by
the Medical Officer of the Privy Council (without any caution
on the side of humanity) with carrying out experiments on
animals at the public expense.

It has been thought advisable to follow the example of the
Eoyal Commissioners, by giving the Evidence as offered before
the Commission, and as it was subsequently altered by Dr.
Klein. It may be found specially interesting to compare those
answers against which an asterisk has been placed.

68

Appendix.

Dr. KLEIN'S EVIDENCE,

From the Short-hand Notes of the
Secretary of the Royal Commission.

(Minutes, p. 183 seq.)

3528. (Chairman.) Are you Assistant
Professor at the Laboratory of the Brown
Institution ? — Yes.

3529. Do* you hold any other public
appointment? — I am Lecturer on His-
tology at the Medical School of St. Bar-
tholomew's Hospital.

3530. Are you the author of the first
section of this book, which is known as
a handbook for the physiological labora-
tory ? — Yes.

*3538. What is your own practice with
egard to the use of anaesthetics in expe-
riments that are otherwise painful ? —
Except for teaching purposes, for jdemon-
stration, I never use anaesthetics, where
it is not necessary for convenience. If
I demonstrate, I use anaesthetics. If I
do experiments for my inquiries in pa-
hological research, except for conveni-
ence sake, as for instance on dogs and
cats, I do not use them. On frogs and
the lower animals I never use them.

*3539. When you say that you only
use them for convenience sake, do you
mean that you have no regard at all to
the suflferings of the animals? — No re-
gard at all.

*3540. You are prepared to establish
that as a principle which you approve ? —
I think that with regard to an experi-
mentor, a man who conducts special
research, and performs an experiment,
he has no time, so to speak, for think-
ing what will the animal feel or suffer.
His only purpose is to perform the expe-

Dr. KLEIN'S EVIDENCE,

As altered by himself, and rejected
by the Royal Commission.

(Appendix, p. 327.)

3528. (C^atrmoTi.) Are you Assistant
Professor at the Laboratory of the Brown
Institution ? — Yes.

8529. Do you hold any other public
appointment ? — I am Lecturer on General
Histology at the Medical School of St.
Bartholomew's Hospital.

3530. Are you the author of the first
section of this book, which is known as
a handbook for the physiological labora-
tory ? — Yes.

8538. What is your own practice with
regard to the use of anaesthetics in expe-
riments that are otherwise x)ainful? —
My own experiments do not involve very
painful operations ; and in them, except
for teaching purposes, for demonstration,
I never use anaesthetics, where it is not
necessary to facilitate the proceedings.
If I demonstrate, I use anaesthetics. If
I do the experiments for mj pathological
research, except for convenience sake,
as for instance on dogs and cats, I do not
use them. On frogs and like animals I
never use them.

3539. When you say that you only use
them for convenience sake, do you mean
that you have no regard at all to the
sufferings of the animals ? — No regard at
all for such little suffering as is in my
operations.

3540. You are prepared to establish
that as a principle which you approve ? —
I think that with regard to an experi-
menter ; a man who conducts special
research and performs an experiment has
no time, so to speak, for thinking what
the animal feels or suffers. If anaesthe-
tics ought to be used, he uses them. If

Foreign Physiologists. 69

riment, to learn as mucli from it as not, he is like a man who performs a
possible, and to do it as quickly as pos- surgical operation in like circumstances,
sible. His only purpose is to perform the expe-

riment, to learn as much from it as pos-
sible, and to do it as quickly as possible.
*3541. Then for your own purposes you 3541. Then for your own purposes you
disregard entirely the question of the disregard entirely the question of the
suffering of the animal in performing a suffiering of the animal in performing a
painful experiment ? — I do. painful experiment ? — To the small ex-

tent which I have described, I do.
3542. Why do you regard it then when 3542. Why do you regard it then when
it is for a demonstration ? — Because I it is for a demonstration ? — Because I
know that there is a great deal of feeling know that there is a great deal of feeling
against it in this country, and when it against it in this countxy, and when it
is not necessary, one should not perhaps is unnecessary, one should not perhaps
act against the opinion or the belief of act against the opinion or the belief of
certain individuals of the auditorium, certain individuals of the auditorium.
One must take regard of the feelings and One ought to take regard of the feelings
opinions of those people before whom and opinions of those persons before
one does the experiment. whom one does the experiment.

*3543. Then am I wrong in attribut- 3543. Then am I wrong in attributing
ing to you that you separate yourself to you that you separate yourself en-
entirely from the feeling which you ob- tirely from the feeling which you observe
serve to prevail in this country in regard to prevail in this country in regard to
to humanity to animals?— I separate humanity to animals? — I separate myself
myself as an investigator from myself as as an investigator from myself as a
a teacher. teacher. I separate myself as an inves-

tigator, when I consult only my own
feelings, from my position as a teacher,
who has to consult and respect the feel-
ings of others. I am as much opposed
as any one in this country to unnecessary
or unprofitable cruelty to animals ; but,
for the purposes of scientific investiga-
tion, I hold that I have the same right
to use the lower animals as has the
sportsman and others in this country.
*3544. But in regard to your proceed- 3544. But in regard to your proceed-
ings as an investigator, you are prepared ings as an investigator, you are prepared
to acknowledge that you hold as entirely to acknowledge that you hold as entirely
indifferent the sufferings of the animsd indifferent the suffierings of the anima
which is subjected to your investigation ? which ia subjected to your investigation
Yes. During the time of the experiment, and

so far as indispensable for its purpose,
yes.
%^ih,(L(yrdWinmfirldgK,) Had you 8546. {LwdWimaarUigh,) Had you
practised before coming to England % — practised before coming to England f-»
Tes, in Vienna. Yes, in Vienna.

70

Appendix.

*3546. Do you believe that that is a
general practice on the Continent, to
disregard altogether the feelings of the
animals ? — I belieye so.

3547. Hare yon, since you have come
to this country, had any proof of what
you state now with regard to the differ-
ent feeling that j)ervades the inhabitants
of England with regard to the feelings
of the animals on which you operate ?
Have you had any instances of the con-
traiy feeling to that which you have just
mentioned, cm the part of Englishmen,
since you )iava,C|Dme to tbis.cou];itry ?-r-
Tes, thpre. if a gre^t deal of difference.

3543. :Tou have seen it exhibited ?—
Yes.
*3549. Would you give the Commis-
sion an instance in which any such feel-
ing has been exhibited ?— I mean with
regard to the journals ; the outcry and
agitation carried on in the different
journals against the practice of vivisec-
tion. There is no snch thing abroad ;
there the general public takes no view,
does not claim to pronounce any criti-
cism or any judgment about scientific
teaching or physiology in general.

*3553. But you believe that generally
speaking there is a very different feeling
in England ?— Not amongst the physio-
logists ; I do not think there is.

*3554. But amongst the people of En-
glaad do you think there is a very dif-
ferent feeling from what exists upon the
Continent on this subject ?— Tes, I think

BO.

8555. Seeing that there is that feel-

3546. Do you believe that that is a
general practice on the Continent, to
disregard altogether the feelings of the
animals ? — I believe that, there as here,
in cases where it is necessary to inflict
pain, the experimenter (like an operating
surgeon) would disregard the pain.

3547. Have you, since you have come
to this country, had any proof of what
yqu state now with regard to the differ-
ent feeling that pervades the inhabitants
of England with regard to the feelings
of the animals on which you operate ?
Have you had any instances of the con-
trary feeling to that wh^ch you have just
mentioned, on the i>;^ of Englislimen,
since you have come to this country ? —
Tes, there is a great deal of difference.

3548. You have seen.it exhibited ? —
Yes.

3549. Would you give the Coitimission
an instance in which any such feeling
has been exhibited ? — I mean with re-
gard to the journals ; the agitation car-
ried on in the different journals against
what is called vivisection. There is no
sach thing abroad ; there the general
public takes no view, does not claim to
pronounce any criticism or any judgment
about scientific teaching and research in
general. It assumes that men of science,
like men in general, have conscience
enough not needlessly to hurt brute ani-
mals.

3353. But you believe that generally
speaking there is "a very different feeling
in England ? — Not amongst the physio-
logists ; I do not think there is, but I
cannot speak with authority.

3554. Bat amongst the people of En-
gland do you think there is a very dif-
ferent feeling from what exists upon the
Continent on this subject ? — Yes, I think
so. In England they seem more disposed
to take care of other people's consciences
in matters they do not clearly under-
stand.

3555. Seeing that there is that feel

Foreign Physiologists.

71

ing, have you found that in yielding to
that feeling in your lectures your expe-
riments have not been so effective as
they would have been if you had acted
without anfflsthetics? — Well, really I
could not say.

3556. How long have you practised in
England ? — Four years and a half now.
*3562. Could you explain more in Re-
tail why you think it necessary, besides
the point of time, to abstain from the
use of anaesthetics in cases of research ?
I fancy the whole attention of the in-
vestigator is drawn to the purpose of the
experiment. He has made clear to him-
self what he is going to do, how he is
going to do it, and what he is going to
learn by it. He generally chloroforms a
dog when he experiments on a dog for
convenience sake, in order not to be dis-
turbed by the howling and the resistr
ance; and so with cats. He does not
do it with frogs. I do not think we
have any right to regard the sensibility
and feeling of a frog as being of a very
high degree. And just as little as a
sportsman or a cook goes inquiring into
the detail of the whole business while
the sportman is hunting or the cook
putting a lobster into boiling water,
just as little as one may expect these
persons to go inquiring into the detail
of the feeling of the animal, just as little
can the physiologist or the investigator
be expected to devote time and thought
to inquiring what this animal will feel
while he is doing the experiment. His
whole attention is only directed to the
making the experiment^ how to do it
quickly, and to learn the most that he
can from it.

*3563. But do you think that where
it is only a question of time a professor

ing, have you found that in yielding to
that feeling in your lectures, your expe-
riments have not been so effective as
they would have been if you had acted
without anaesthetics? — Well, really I
could not say. I have had no opportunity
of judging.

3556. How long have yon practised in
England ? — Four years and a half now.

3562. Could you explain more in de-
tail why you think it necessary, besides
the point of time, to abstain from the
use of anaesthetics in cases of research !
Let me again explain that my experi-
ments do not involve severely painful
operations, and I therefore am speaking
of the (so to speak) superfluous use of
anaesthetics. Where superfluous, they
are to be objected to, because the whole
attention of the investigator ought to be
given to the purpose of the experiment.
He has made clear to himself what he is
going to do, how he is going to do it,
and what he is going to learn by it. He
generally chloroforms a dog when he
experiments on a dog for convenience
sake, in order not to be disturbed by the
howling and the resistance ; and so with
cats. He does not do it with frogs. I
do not think we have any right to regard
the sensibility and feeling of a frog as
being of a very high degree. And just
as little as a sportsman or a cook goes
inquiring while the sportsman is hunt-
ing or the cook putting a lobster into
boiling water, just as little as one may
expect these pei'sons go inquiring into
the detail of the feeling of the animal,
just as little can the physiologist or the
investigator be expected to devote time
and thought to inquiring what this ani-
mal feels while he is doing the experi-
ment. His whole attention is only
directed to the making th^ experiment,
how to do it quickly, and to learn the
most from it that he can.

3563. But do you think that where
it is only a question of time a professor

72 Appendix.

of physdology is not boand to consult of physiology is not bound to consult

humanitarian feelings ?^-I must again humanitarian feelings ? — Certainly ; but

draw a distinction between an invest!- I must again draw a distinction between

gator and a professor of physiology. I an investigator and a professor of phy-

understand a professor of physiology is siology. I understand a professor of

a man who teaches, and there I think physiology to be a man who teaches,

it is quite right before a class that when and there I think it is quite right that

one performs an experiment one should when one performs an experiment before

use aniesthetics, but an investigator has a class one should use anaesthetics, but

no time. I myself, when I am going to an investigator has no occasion to use

make an experiment for pathological re- anaesthetics except from the real neces-

search, have no time really with regard sity of the case and where severely pain-

what the animal will feel. ful operations are in question.

8564. Is that really the only reason 8564. Is that really the only reason
that you can give for not using anaes- that you can give for not using anaes-
thetics ? — It is to a great extent ; it is thetics \ — It is to a great extent ; it is
the chief reason I should say ; there is the chief reason I should say ; there is
no place for considering that point. no place for considering that point.

3568. Have you found much progress 3568. Have you found much progress
in physiological science lately in this in physiological science lately in this
country ? — I think so. country ? — I think so, very considerable.

3569. You find more attention given 3569. You find more attention given
to it than when you first came ? — Yes, to it than when you first came ? — ^Yes,
considerably more. considerably more.

3596. Have you, for private investi- 3596. Have you, for private investi-
gation, tried any experiments on dogs or gation, tried any experiments on dogs or
cats, not pathalogical, but physiological cats, not pathalogical, but physiological
experiments ?— No, not directly for phy- experiments ? — No, not directly for phy-
siological experiments. I may have Biological experiments. I may have
used a dog which has been used at th^ used a dog which has been used at the
same time for pathological purposes, also same time for pathological purposes, also
for physiological. for physiological.

8597. (Chairman.) When you use a 8597. (Chairman.) When you use a

dog for physiological purposes, do you dog for physiological purposes, do you

adopt any particular mode of fastening adopt any particular mode of fastening

that dog ? — No ; it is fastened on a large that dog ? — No, it is fastened on a large

board, the four limbs are fastened. board, the four limbs are fastened.

3598. And how are they fastened ? — 8598. And how are they fastened ? —
With broad bands. With broad bands, as when giving chlo-
roform.

3599. (Mr. Forster. ) You were stating 3599. {Mr. Fonter.) You were stating
that you considered it was so important that you considered it was so important
to be absorbed upon the object of the to be absorbed upon the object of the
experiment, that you could think of no- experiment, that you could think of no-
thing else, and therefore could not really, thing else, and therefore could not really,
in your opinion, afford time to consider in your opinion, afford time to consider
the feelings of the animal ; do you not the feelings of the animal ; do you not
sometimes find an inconvenient inter- sometimes find an inconvenient inter-

Foreign Physiologists.

n

mption from tbe cries of the animal ? —
Only then I do use chloroform, that is
what I said ; I use anaesthetics for con-
venience sake.

3600. Do you ever use curari for that
purpose, to stop the cries ? — Curari
involves other difficulties ; the animal
ceases to breathe because it paralyses
the movement for breathing, and that
might be against the object of the ex-
periment. The animal, for instance, is
to be kept alive after the experiment
was over for some time ; that could not
be done after artificial respiration has
been used.

3601. But practically, has not the
howling of the dogs interfered with ex-
X)eriments? — Dogs do howl also when
you chloroform them.

3602. Do you try experiments with
any animals that do not signify pain so
loudly ?— Babbits.

3603. They do not howl, I suppose ?
They do not.

3604. Then of course the same motive
would not induce you to use chloroform
in their case ? — No.

*3605. In fact, I suppose with rabbits
you would not use chloroform? — I use
chloral hydrate ; but, as a general rule,
for my scientific investigations, I do not
use chloroform, or any other anaesthetic,
except for convenience sake, in dogs and
cats, and for no other animals as a
general rule. There may be exceptions
perhaps, but as a general rule, I think
I am safe in saying I do not use it.

*3606. You gave it as your opinion,
that your views on the subject, although
not shared by the British public gene-
rally, were the views of the Bntish
physiologists?— I would not say that dis-

ruption from the cries of the animal ? —
I do then use chloroform, that is what I
said ; I use anaesthetics for convenience
sake in the sense already spoken of.

3600. Do you ever use curare for that
purpose, to stop the cries ? — Curare
involves other difficulties ; the animal
ceases to breathe because it paralyses
the movement for breathing, and that
might be against the object of the ex-
periment. Tbe animal, for instance, is
to be kept alive for some time after the
experiment is over; that could not be
done after artificial respiration has been
induced.

3601. But practically, has not the
howling of the dogs interfered with ex-
periments ? — Dogs do howl aLso when
you chloroform them.

3602. Do you try experiments with
any animals that do not signify pain so
loudly ?— Babbits.

3603. They do not howl, I suppose ?
They do not.

3604. Then of course the same motive
would not induce you to use chloroform
in their case ? — No.

3605. In fact, I suppose with rabbits
you would not use chloroform ? — I prefer
^nd use chloral hydrate ; but, as a
general rule, for any not severely painful
scientific investigations, I do not use
chloroform, or any other ansesthetic, ex-
cept for convenience sake, in dogs and
cats, and for no other animals as a
general rule. There may be exceptions
perhaps, but as a general rule, I think
I am safe in saying I do not use it. I
wish distinctly that it be understood
that I refer only to such experiments as
I myself make, namely, injection into
the abdominal cavity and injection into
the vein.

3606. You gave it as your opinion,
that your views on the subject, although
not shared by the British public gene-
rally, were tbe views of the British
physiologists?-— I would not say that dis-

74

Appendix.

tinctly, but I know a few of them, and
I think that is the view held by them.

3612. But what experiments you have
tried have been tried in the Brown In-
stitution at your own cost, I suppose? —
In my private room. Those that I do
for teaching purposes, physiological pur-
poses just referred to, I do in my private
room ; I live there.

3626. Are these pupils of yours in
any way connected with the London
University ? — No ; they are pupils from
different hospitals who wish to enter
more closely into the study of micro-
scopical anatomy.
. 3627. And in the teaching of those
pupils you draw no distinction between
painful experiments and non-painful
experiments if the students themselves
raise no objection to see the animal
subjected to pain ? — Yes ; I think that
would be quite what I expressed before.

3628. Therefore any students who
come there, so far as your teaching and
influence are concerned, adopt, I pre-
sume, the principle that you have
adopted ? — ^Yes.

*3629. And consider that a physio-
logical inquirer has too much to do to
think about the sufferings of the ani-
mals ? — Yes ; may I be allowed to state,
with regard to experiments for teaching
pui*pose3, that there are extremely few
that I really do.

*3631. But now coming to vivisection
proper, you do perform in this labora-
tory operations which involved a great
deal of pain to the animal? — Yes, we
do occasionally ; of course they are very
few.

tinctly, but I know a few of them, and
I think that is the view held by them,
but of course being a foreigner I have
no authority of saying so.

3612. But what experiments you have
tried ha,ve been tried in the Brown In-
stitution at your own cost, I suppose % —
In my private room. Those that I do
for teaching purposes, phyuological pur-
X)oses, I do in my private room \ I live
there.

3626. Are these pupils of yours in
any way connected with the London
University ? — No ; they are pupils from
different hospitals who wish to enter
more closely into microscopical or histo-
logical anatomy.

3627. And in the teaching of those
pupils you draw no distinction between
painful experiments and non -painful
experiments if the students themselves
raise no objection to see the animal
subjected to pain ?— Yes ; I think that
would be quite what I expressed before.

3628. Therefore any students who
come there, so far as your teaching and
influence are concerned, adopt, I pre-
sume, the principle that you have
adopted ? — Yes.

8629. And consider that a physio-
logical inquirer has too much to do to
think about the sufferings of the ani-
mals ? — Yes, excepted beforehand ; may
I be allowed to state, with regard to ex-
periments for teaching purposes, that
there are extremely few that I really
make. I wish again to repeat that my
investigations are almost entirely of a
histological and pathological character,
that is into the study of healthy and
diseased structures.

3631. But now coming to vivisection
proper, you do perform in this labora-
tory operations which involved a great
deal of pain to the animal ? — Not as
operations, but in their eventual results
^e do occasionally ; of coui'se they are
very few, they are as follows : injection

Foreign Physiologists,

75

*3632. And without any qaestion of
employing ansestheticsy unless it happens
to be for your own convenience to do so ?
—Yes.

*3683. And that principle, so far as
yoar influence goes, is derived from you
by the pupils who come to benefit by
your teaching? — ^That applies only to
that part of the experiments which is
for teaching purposes.

8641. When you take hold of an
animal for this purpose, what is done
with it; do you bind it up while you
are making this injection ? — If it is a
large vigorous animal, as a dog, we do
bind it and fasten it. A cat we gene-
rally must chloroform.

3642. Why do you not chloroform a
dog ? — ^We chloroform a cat because we
are afraid of being scratched.

3643. Why not a dog?— If it is a
small dog there is no fear of being bitten
by the dog.

*3650. want to know whether he
(Mr. Simon) has ever told you, as a
general rule, for your guidance, that in
any severely painful operation chloro-
form is to be administered for any ex-
periment connected with the Privy Coun-
cil? — The only direction which Mr.
Simon gives is, that he gives the thema
to do this and that investigation; but
to say how we are to do it, or to criti-
cise the results we obtain, I do not think
he ever undertakes.

*3660. As I understand you, if you
were directed to perform an operation
for the purpose of ascertaining some
fact, or supposed fact, with reference to
the nerves of a dog, and it became
necessary to cut the back of the dog
severely for the purpose of exposing the

into the abdominal cavity and into the
vein.

3632. And without any question of
employing anaesthetics, unless it happens
to be for your own convenience to do so ?
— Yes, anaesthetics would not be appli-
cable, but the animal is generally not
allowed to continue long in the diseased
state.

3633. And that principle, so far as
your influence goes, is derived from you
by the pupils who come to benefit by
your teaching ?— That miy be so or not,
that applies only to the experiments
which are for teaching purposes.

3641. When you take hold of an
animal for this purpose, what is done
with it ; do you bind it up while jrou
are making this injection ? — If it is a
large vigorous animal,* as a dog, we do
bind it. A cat we generally must chlo-
roform.

3642. Why do you not chloroform a
dog ? — I chloroform a cat because I am
afraid of being scratched.

3643. Why not a dog ?— If it is a
small dog there is no fear of being bitten
by the dog.

3650. I want to know whether he
has ever told you, as a general rule, for
your guidance, that in any severely pain-
ful operation chloroform is to be admi-
nistered for any experiment connected
with the Privy Council? — The only
direction which Mr. Simon gives is
general. He asks us to do this or that
investigation ; but to say how we are to
do it, or to criticise the results we obtain,
I do not think he ever undertakes, and
besides I have had no direct relations
with Mr. Simon.

3660. As I understand you, if you
were directed to perform an operation
for the purpose of ascertaining some
fact, or supposed fact, with reference to
the nerves of a dog, and it became
necessary to cut the back of the dog
severely for the purpose of exposing the

76

Appendix.

dog*8 nerves, for the sake of saTing your-
self inconvenience, you would at once
perform that withont the use of ansBS-
thetics ?— Yes.

*d661. And it is only because the
dog might howl, or get into contortions,
that you would use ansssthetics at all ?
Yes.

3681. In the case of frogs, you never
take out any part of the brain before
you perform these experiments, do you ?
No.

3682. That is a short process, is it
not I — Yes.

3683. But you think it unnecessary,
because you say that a physiologist has a
right to do as he likes with the animal ?
Yes,

8700. Now there was one answer
which you gave in the course of the
questions put to you in which you said
that other physiologists in England take
the same view of the subject that you
do. Do you know any physiologist that
works in his private laboratory except
yourself in England ?— I think that is
more a matter of private talk, is it not ?

3701. You have given an answer ; I
want to know whether you have any
accurate information which enables you
to say that other physiologists in England
take the same view of the subject that
you do % — ^I have no accurate knowledge
about it. I only expressed an opinion,
a belief. I believe it is so ; I could not
prove it, and I do not know for certain
whether it is so ; but I believe that
there are other physiologists who take
the same view that I do.

3739. And you think that the view
of scientific men on the Continent is
your view, that animal suffering is so
entirely unimportant compared with
scientific research that it should not be

dog*s nerves, for the sake of saving your-
self inconvenience, you would at onee
perform that without the use of anes-
thetics ? — Yes, if it were against the
pun)ose of the experiment.

3661. And it is only because the dog
might howl, or get into contortions, that
you would use anassthetics at all ? — Yes^
that is to say, this would be one reason
for use, where otherwise the anaesthet-
ics might be unnecessary.

3681. In the case of frogs, you never
take out any part of the brain before
you perform these experiments, do you ?
No.

3682. That is a short process, is it
not?— Yes.

3683. But you think it unnecessary,
because you say that a physiologist has
a right to do as he likes with the animal ?
Yes.

3700. Now there was one answer
which you gave in the course of the
questions put to you in which you said
that other physiologists in England take
the same view of the subject that you
do. Do you know any physiologist that
works in his private laboratory except
yourself in England ? — I think that is
more a matter of private talk.

3701. You have given an answer; I
want to know whether you have any
accurate information which enables you
to say that other physiologists in England
take the same view of the subject that
you do ? — I have no accurate knowledge
about it. I only expressed an opinion,
a belief. I believe it is so ; I could not
prove it, and I do not know for certain
whether it is so ; I believe that there
are other physiologists who take the
same view that I do.

3739. And you think that the view
of scientific men on the Continent is
your view, that animal suffering is so
entirely unimportant compared with
scientific research that it should not be

Foreign Physiologists.

77

taken into account at all ? — Yes, except
for con?enience sake.

3746. (Mr, Forster,) Do you recol-
lect whether Mr. Simon informed you
that when I was in office I had said
something to him about this, or did he
give you a minute that I wrote? — I
think he spoke to me about it ; but
really it is so long ago that I could not
be certain.

8747. Ton cannot recollect whether
he gave you a minute ?— No.

3748. You do not recollect his giving
you any words written by me, to this
effect, "That no experiments on living
animals should be conducted at the cost
of the State without the employment of
•ome anaesthetic in case of painful ope-
ration, and without a report from time
to time by the gentleman conducting the
experiments, explaining their object and
showing their necessity for the purpose
of discovery.** Do you recollect seeing
those words ? — No. May I be allowed
to say this, that at that time I was not
connected directly with Mr. Simon. I
was at that time simply an assistant of
Dr. Burdon Sanderson, so that Mr. Simon
could not have occasion to give me that
instruction in an official way.

3749. When you were put directly
under him you had not that minute laid
before you, as I understand you ? — ^No.

3753. You stated just now that you
believed that curari was an aniesthetic
for certain animals ? — Yes.

*3754. What are your reasons for
that belief ? — My reasons are chiefly the
experiments given by Schiff; he made

taken into account at all? — Yes, in
cases where important results to man-
kind are in question, and the results
cannot be got without animal suffering.

3746. {Mr, Forster.) Do you recol-
lect whether Mr. Simon informed you
that when I was in office I had said
something to him about this, or did he
give you a minute that I wrote? — I
think he spoke to me about it ; but
really it is so long ago that I could not
be certain.

3747. You cannot recollect whether
he gave you a minute ? — No ; my
business relations with him at that
time were exclusively through Dr. San-
derson.

3748. You do not recollect his giving
you any words written by me, to this
effect, **That no experiments on living
animals should be conducted at the cost
of the State without the employment of
some anaesthetic in case of painful ope-
ration, and without a report from time
to time by the gentleman conducting
the experiments, explaining their object
and showing their necessity for the pur-
pose of discovery.*' Do you recollect
seeing those words? — ^No. May I be
allowed to repeat that at that time I
was not connected directly with Mr.
Simon. I was at that time simply an
assistant of Dr. Burdon Sanderson, so
that Mr. Simon could not have had
occasion to give me that instruction in
an official way.

3749. When you were put directly
under him you had not that minute
laid before you, as I understand you ? —
I am only quite recently in direct busi-
ness relation with Mr. Simon, and this
is not in experimental investigation.

3753. You stated just now that you
believed that curare was an anaesthetic
for certain animals ? — Yes.

3754. What are your reasons for
that belief ? — My reasons are chiefly the
experiments given by Schiff; he made

78

Appendix.

some experiment, and I thmk it proves
that curari does not act always on the
sensitive nerves. We know that it
paralyses the motor nerves.

3755. But Claude Bernard says, does
he not, that it does not destroy the
sensitiveness? — ^That was the general
belief until these experiments of SchifiTs
were known.

3756. Have you read Claude Ber-
nard's reasons for his view? — No, I have
not.

3757. (Mr, Sutton.)- You are per-
haps aware that Claude Bernard de-
scribes two experiments on man with
curare ?— No.

some experiment, and I think it proves
that curare does under certain condi-
tions act on the sensitive nerves. * We
know that it paralyses the motor nerves.

3755. But Claude Bernard says, does
he not, that it does not destroy the
sensitiveness? — ^That was the general
belief until the experiments of SchifTs
were known.

3755. Have you read Claude Ber-
nard's reasons for his view ? — No, I have
not.

3757. {Mr. Mutton.) You are per-
haps aware that Claude Bernard de-
scribes two experiments on man with
curare ? — No.

(G.)

BeaJSons for Exemption of Horses, Asses, and Mules
fix>m PhysiologricaJ Experiments.

The arguments in favour of exempting Horses, Asses, and
Mules, from physiological experiments, do not cover all the
ground of the reasons adduced by Mr. Hutton to prove that
the Household Animals^ Dogs and Cats, should enjoy such
immunity, but are nevertheless sufficiently cogent.

1. Horses, especially high-bred and carefully-tended ani-
mals, are unquestionably extremely sensitive, as may be seen
by their behaviour under ill-fitting harness, the bites of in-
sects, or very moderate correction of the whip ; and it is pre-
sumable that, if they are conscious of such slight injuries,
they must be very sensitive to serious lesions, such as vivi-
sections generally involve. ^

2. Although Englishmen are rarely, like the Arabs, in such
close and affectionate relations with horses as to cause their
exposure to torture to assume altogether the character of
" treachery I' rightly imputed by Mr. Hutton to the vivisection
of dogs and cats, yet the services we accept from them, the
amount of pleasure and profit which we derive bom, their
ready performance of our tasks and obedience to our will,
renders the cruel treatment of them a kind of Ingraiitude
scarcely less ungenerous and debasing. A horse, ass, or mule,
which has served us with all its strength and intelligence
for ten or fifteen years, certainly deserves nothing less at our

8o Appendix.

hands than a death — when death is needful — as speedy and
painless as may be — rather than that we should conclude its
life's devotion by hours of torture.

3. It is to be feared that if experiments on dogs and cats be
prohibited by law, and a similar exemption be not extended
to horses, asses, and mules, the latter animals will be used
for a certain class of experiments (especially when old and to
be purchased at a small price) more frequently than at pre-
sent. According to the evidence of Mr. James Mills before
the Commission (4957 et seq.), it appears that a horse would
probably be a favourite subject for the experiments of stu-
dents. Mr. Mills mentions one " bought for the purpose of
dissecting*' last winter at Edinburgh, "subjected for a whole
week to various operations, such as tenotomy and neurotomy,
and various minor operations " — " no anaesthetics whatever
were given:" the operations were "very painful," and were
done " for the purpose of the students simply demonstrating
to each other things that could be learnt in every-day prac-
tice." All this has happened in the United Kingdom, in the
open paddock of a public college. There is too much reason to
apprehend that, were the Household Animals alone exempted
from experiment, while the high price of the far less sensitive
cows and sheep would obtain for them practical immunity,
there would be a redoubled temptation to buy up worn-out
horses, &c., for such use.

4. There is a certain class of exquisitely painful experiments
to which these noble and intelligent animals seem particularly
exposed. Putting out of view the prolonged tortures of the
veterinary schools of Alfort and Lyons (where sixty opera-
tions, lasting ten hours, were habitually performed on the same
animal as a practice of manipulative skill for the students),
some strictly physiological experiments upon horses and asses,
published in Dr. Brown Sequard's Journal de Physiologie, Vol.
IV. No. xiii., reveal the sort of treatment which these animals
may be expected to receive at the hands of experimentors.
The operator, who describes his own proceedings, is M. A.

Exemption of Horses^ (2fc. 8i

Chauveau, Chef des Travatix d^anatomie et de physiologic d
V4cole Impdriale Veterinaire de Lyons. His object was to
ascertain the " excitability of the spinal marrow, and the con-
vulsions and pain produced by that excitability." His study,
he says, was made almost exclusively sur les animaux solip^es,
who "lend themselves marvellously by the large volume of
their spinal marrow ** to such experiments ; and he " conse-
crated specially to this purpose eighty subjects." The import-
ance of the results, he says, are not in proportion to the
trouble they have cost ; but such as they are, he hopes that
they will concur with the observations of Flourens, Magendie,
Longet, Bernard, Brown S(5quard, and Schiff, in founding the
laws which preside over the action of the spinal marrow. The
animal is fixed on a table ; an incision is made in its back of
from thirty to thirty-five centimetres ; the vertebrae are opened
with the help of chisel, mallet, and pincers, and the spinal
marrow exposed. No mention is made, in the very elaborate
description of this operation, of the use of any anaesthetic
whatever. Here are some of his cases. Case 7 — a vigorous
Mule. " When one pricks the marrow near the line of
emergence of the sensitive nerves, the animal manifests the
most violent pain. It groans and tries almost furious move-
ments." Case 8 — an Ass. The scratching of the marrow
provokes immediately signs of violent suffering. Case 1 —
small Ass, very thin — pricked on the line of emergence of the
posterior roots, " dovleur intense" (This poor little beast had
been subjected the previous day to a most painful operation —
of course useless, since M. Chauveau's experiment must have
involved death.) Case 1 1 — a vigorous Horse. " Most evident
signs of pain, groans and makes disorderly movements." Case
20 — Old white Horse — " lying on the litter unable to rise,
but nevertheless very sensitive." " At whatever point I
scratch the posterior cord, I provoke signs of the most violent
suffering." . . . . " The animal agitates itself most violently "
(p. 48).

It is surely to be desired that experiments like these on our

p

82 Appendix.

humble and faithful servants, when worn out in our service,
should not be left to the discretion of even licensed physiolo-
gists, whatever may be their claims to humanity, but should be
peremptorily prohibited by law, as involving a dereliction from
all just and generous sentiment, for which no acquisition of
new facts to science could possibly compensate or atone.

C. Green & Sou, Frinteri, 178| Strand.

Pamphlets and Leaflets published by the Society.

[To be obtained by Members gratis, on application at the Office of the Society,
1, Victoria Street, Westminster. Price to Non-Members as below.]

Vivisection. Important Evidence of a Witness. Letter by Dr. HoaaAN to
Morning Post, \d.

Aneesthetics and the Lower Animals. Letter by Dr. Hoqgan to

Spectcbtor. ^d.

Urari or Curctre. By Dr. Hoqoan. ^d.

Notes on Vivisection. By "A Student of Medicine." Id.

Paul Bert's Observations on a Curarized Dogr. Wi*l» Note by

Dr. HoGOAN. \d.
Letter to Bcho. By F. K. Head, ^d.

The Plea of the Modem Sworn Tormentor. By Evelyn

BOBLASB. 2d.

The Moral Aspects of Vivisection. By Frances Powee Cobbb.
dd.

Statement of the Committee, on the Report of the Royal
Commission. With Appendix, containing Sxtracts fix>m the
Minutes of Evidence. 8<2.

IHIIi